JIIEOLCGICAL  SEMINARY.  I 

<  l\     Princeton,  N.  J.  (| 

BV  601.5  .M33  1844 

Manning,  Henry  Edward,  1808- 

1892. 
The  unity  of  the  Church 


(*M.^'  ^ 


cJT^  J€  >. 


THE 


UNITY  OF  THE   CHURCH 


HENRY  EDWARD  MANNING-,  M.  A., 

ARCHDEACON   OF   CHICHESTER. 


NEW-YORK  : 
D.  APPLETON    &  CO.,  200  BROADWAY. 

PHILADELPHIA: 
GEO.  S.  APPLETON,  148  CHESNUT-ST. 

MDCCCXLIV. 


PART  I. 

THE    HISTORY    AND    EXPOSITION    OF    THE 
DOCTRINE  OF  CATHOLIC  UNITY. 


LAUS    DEO.  &^^^ 

General  Introduction        .    <J|.      .        -o,    •        •       a  •o"*4  ••^-*       ^ 

The  History  and  Exposition  of  the  Doctrine  of 
Catholic  Unity. 

CHAPTER  1. 

The  Antiquity  of  the  Article  "  I  believe  in  the  Holy  Church"    .        .      16 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Interpretation  of  the  Article  "  The  Holy  Church,"  as  taught  by 

uninspired  Writers >      31 

CHAPTER  III. 
The  Unity  of  the  Church  as  taught  in  Holy  Scripture    ....      62 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Form  and  Matter  of  Unity 80 

Conclusion  to  the  First  Part 137 


PART   II. 

The  Moral  Design  of  Catholic  Unity. 


CHAPTER  I. 
The  Moral  Design  of  the  Church  as  shown  by  Holy  Scripture 


143 


6  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  II. 

Page 

The  Unity  of  the  Church  a  Means  to  restore  the  true  Knowledge  of 

God    .        .        ; 157 

CHAPTER  III. 
The  Unity  of  the  Church  a  Means  to  restore  Man  to  the  Image  of  God     191 

CHAPTER  IV. 
The  Unity  of  the  Church  a  Probation  of  the  Faith  and  Will  of  Man    .    212 
Conclusion  to  the  Second  Part 230 


PART    III. 

The  Doctrine  of  Catholic  Unity  applied  to  the  Actual  State 
OF  Christendom. 

CHAPTER  I. 
The  Unity  of  the  Church  the  only  revealed  Way  of  Salvation      .        .    237 

CHAPTER  II. 
The  Loss  of  Objective  Unity 254 

CHAPTER  III. 

The  Loss  of  Subjective  Unity 290 

General  Conclusion    .        .        .        .        • 300 


.T^\^' 


^\  ^■ 


kx 


THE 


UNITY   or   THE   CHURCH 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION. 

St.  Augustin,  in  his  book  concerning  the  instruction 
of  persons  ignorant  of  the  Christian  doctrine,  after  giving 
many  rules  for  the  guidance  of  the  teacher,  adds,  "  but 
if  the  catechumen  be  slow  of  understanding,  and  have 
neither  hearing  nor  heart  for  the  sweetness  of  truth,  he 
must  be  borne  with  tenderly,  and  after  a  short  and  curso- 
ry statement  of  other  points,  those  things  which  are 
chiefly  necessary  are  to  be  inculcated  with  much  of  aw^e, 
such  as  the  Unity  of  the  CathoUc  Church,  the  nature  of 
temptation,  and  of  the  Christian  hfe  by  reason  of  the 
judgment  to  come.'"  It  will  sound  strange  to  modern 
ears  to  hear  the  Unity  of  the  Church  thus  numbered 
among  the  first  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ ;  and 
by  this  we  may  measure  how  remote  are  our  habits  of 
thought  from  the  tone  of  CathoHc  behef  It  is  to  be  noted, 
moreover,  that  St.  Augustin  does  not  treat  the  doctrine 
of  unity  as  a  first  principle  only,  but  as  an  elementary  or 
axiomatic  truth  among  the  first  principles  of  faith.  It  is 
to  be  taught  to  all  catechumens,  even  to  the  least  inielli' 

1}  S,  Aug.  de  Catechiz.  Rudibus.  c.  xiii, 


10         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

gent  of  them.  It  is,  in  fact,  an  object  of  faith,  and  a  rule 
of  Hfe,  without  which  no  man  can  become  a  Cathohc 
Christian.  Whatsoever  any  man  may  safely  either  not 
know  at  all,  or  know  but  in  part,  this  at  least  he  must 
know  thoroughly,  and  believe  without  a  doubt. 

The  reasons  of  this  necessity  are  many  and  obvious  ; 
and  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  touch  on  one  or  two,  that  we 
may  form  some  juster  estimate  of  the  great  importance 
of  the  subject  on  which  we  are  about  to  enter. 

1.  First,  then,  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church 
is  most  necessary  to  be  known  and  believed,  as  an  object 
of  faith,  by  all  Christians,  because  it  is  in  the  One  Church 
alone  that  there  is  a  revealed  way  of  salvation  in  the 
Name  of  Christ  It  is  not  requisite,  in  this  place,  to  do 
more  than  affirm  this  mysterious  doctrine.  Its  meaning, 
limits,  and  application,  we  shall  consider  hereafter.  It  is 
enough  only  to  refer  to  it ;  for  all  Christians  agree  in  be- 
lieving that  there  is  such  a  mystery  in  the  Gospel :  they 
differ  only  in  expounding  the  nature  and  fixing  the  limits 
of  the  one  Church  in  which  alone  salvation  is  revealed 
to  man.  Whatsoever,  then,  be  the  doctrine  of  salvation 
in  the  Church  only,  it  is  plainly  so  related  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Unity  or  Oneness  of  the  Church  itself,  as  to  render 
a  right  understanding  of  the  nature  of  the  Church,  i.  e., 
what,  and  where  it  is,  highly  necessary  to  all  men  who 
are  seeking  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ.  For  if  they 
know  not  what  nor  where  the  Church  is,  how  shall  they 
partake  of  the  salvation  which  is  enshrined  in  it  ?  And  if 
they  know  not  the  nature  and  limits  of  the  Church,  how, 
even  after  finding  it,  shall  they  be  assured  that  they  still 
abide  in  the  way  of  life  ?  And  this  brings  us  to  another 
reason, 

2.  Secondly,  the  Unity  of  the  Church  is  most  neces- 
sary to  be  known  and  acted  on  as  a  rule  of  life  by  all 
Christians,  because  it  is  a  principle  of  moral  obligation. 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION.  11 

In  the  first  place,  it  is  the  correlative  of  schism,  and  a 
safeguard  against  it.  By  a  right  knowledge  of  unity, 
Catholic  Christians  know  also  the  nature  and  forms  of 
schism.  It  is  evident  that  without  this  knowledge  they 
may,  and  we  daily  see  that  they  do,  countenance,  partake 
in,  and  even  themselves  originate,  acts  which  are  materi- 
ally schismatical, — such,  for  instance,  as  aiding  in  the 
propagation  of  sectarian  bodies,  being  present  at  acts  of 
worship,  or  teaching,  without  the  pale  of  the  Church,  and 
the  like.  It  matters  not,  in  this  view  of  the  case,  what 
be  the  true  doctrine  of  unity  and  of  schism :  because,  that 
there  are  such  realities  in  the  Christian  scheme,  and  that 
unity  is  a  duty  and  schism  a  sin,  all  Christians  agree 
in  believing.  It  is  as  necessary,  therefore,  to  know  their 
true  nature  and  definition,  as  it  is  to  know  the  limits  of 
truth  and  falsehood,  and  the  boundary-lines  of  good  and 
evil.  It  is,  in  fact,  a  matter  of  revealed  obligation,  and 
a  particular  form  of  Christian  ethics. 

3.  Again,  a  right  knowledge  of  the  nature  of  Unity 
is  necessary,  not  only  as  a  safeguard  against  schism,  but 
as  a  guide  in  the  whole  complicated  texture  of  a  Chris- 
tian man's  life.  It  enters  into  every  function  and  act  of 
the  Church  around  him :  it  is  in  her  teaching,  her  worship, 
her  sacraments,  her  ceremonies,  her  discipline,  her  peni- 
tential order,  her  censures,  her  absolutions :  it  runs 
through  his  private  life,  in  all  acts  of  domestic  religion,  in 
all  the  conduct,  and  temper,  and  converse  of  a  Catholic 
Christian:  it  besets  him  behind  and  before,  and  lays  its 
hand  upon  him  in  all  his  relations  to  his  brethren,  to  his 
pastor,  to  his  Lord:  it  is  a  governing  rule  of  his  moral 
choice,  teaching  him  what  to  do  and  what  to  forbear,  what 
to  testify  and  what  to  hold  in  silence :  it  is  the  outward 
index,  and  the  unerring  means  of"  the  unity  of  the  Spirit 
in  the  bond  of  peace,"  and  thereby  of  his  perfection  in 
the  likeness  of  Christ. 


12  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Now  these  are  some  among  many  reasons  which  might 
be  brought  to  show  the  necessity  of  dehvering  to  all  cate- 
chumens the  doctrine  of  Catholic  Unity.  There  are 
also  two  remarks  I  would  make  on  the  present  condition 
of  the  Church  of  Christ,  which  will  the  more  strongly 
impress  on  us  the  duty  of  faithfully  instructing  our 
people  in  this  great  rule  of  life. 

And  first  it  must  be  remembered  that  this  doctrine 
which,  in  the  time  of  St.  Augustin,  was  definite  and  un- 
doubted, is  now  perplexed  and  gainsaid.  In  his  day  the 
nature  of  unity  was  admitted :  the  only  dispute,  as  with  the 
Donatists,  turned  on  the  question,  which  of  two  contend- 
ing bodies  was  indeed  the  one  true  Church.  How  many 
and  various  soever  were  the  sects  by  which  the  Church 
was  then  beset,  she  had  yet  within  a  clear  and  sustained 
consciousness  of  her  own  unity,  of  which  consciousness 
she  carefully  made  all  her  members  to  partake.  They 
carried  with  them,  as  it  were,  a  talisman  which  kept  them 
from  wandering  into  the  conventicles  of  schism.  Now 
we,  in  these  latter  times,  are  beset  by  no  fewer  schisms 
than  they  were  of  old.  The  state  of  the  Western  Church 
for  the  last  three  hundred  years,  our  familiar  intercourse 
with  Christians  in  a  state  of  open  schism,  the  visible 
moral  excellence  of  many  born  and  reared  in  separation, 
the  deadening  effect  of  political  combination,  the  way- 
ward partizanship  of  men  in  the  communion  of  the 
Church,  and  then  again,  together  with  all  these,  a  habit 
of  indifference,  laxity,  and  a  spurious  charity,  which,  like 
a  hidden  stream,  undermines  the  steadfastness  of  princi- 
ple,— all  these  have  so  lowered  the  standard  of  teaching 
and  thought  among  us,  that  we  fail  to  impress  upon  our 
catechumens  any  definite  or  intelligible  idea  of  the  Unity 
of  the  Church,  i.  e.,  what  it  is,  wherein  it  consists,  and 
how  it  makes  us  responsible  for  our  moral  acts.  Certain 
it  isj  that  we  have  come  to  look  upon  the  doctrine  of  Unity 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION.  13 

as  a  part  of  the  theologia  armnta, — as  a  weapon  of  of- 
fence. We  shrink  from  teaching  it,  lest  we  should  seem 
to  condemn  those  who  are  visibly  in  schism ;  and  thus, 
for  the  sins  of  Christendom,  it  has  come  to  pass  that  what 
was  ordained  unto  life  is  found  to  be  unto  death;  and 
men,  by  striving  to  and  fro  to  establish  their  conflicting 
theories,  are  divided  in  the  very  article  of  unity.  Or,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  false  charity  of  being  silent  the  more 
embroils  the  fray ;  so  that,  if  we,  to  whom  the  only  word 
that  can  still  the  storm  has  been  imparted,  shall  refuse  to 
speak  it,  what  do  we  do  ? — what  reckoning  shall  we  give 
to  Him  that  bequeathed  his  peace  unto  us  ?  No  sober 
man  can  doubt  that  one  chief  cause  of  the  continuance 
of  schism,  and  therefore  of  perplexity  and  error,  among 
our  people,  is  our  slackness  in  faithfully  expounding  to 
them  the  articles  of  their  baptismal  creed.  If  the  pastors 
of  the  flock  should  slur  over  the  article  of  the  Incarna- 
tion of  our  Lord  as  they  have  slurred  over  that  of  the 
Unity  of  the  Church,  her  people  would  have  been  long 
since  heretical.  The  low  tone  of  teaching  now  prevalent 
on  this  doctrine  is  one  reason  to  enforce  the  duty  of  be- 
stowing much  anxious  thought  and  care  in  restoring  some 
true  and  effectual  mode  of  inculcating  it  upon  our  cate- 
chumens. 

The  other  remark  I  would  venture  to  make  is  on  the 
defective  state  of  our  catechetical  formularies  in  the  point 
of  this  doctrine.  In  our  Prayer-book  it  is  everywhere 
assumed  that  the  people  are  duly  taught  in  the  nature  of 
the  one  Church :  as,  for  instance,  in  the  Prayer  for  all 
sorts  and  conditions  of  men;  in  the  collects  for  the  Feasts 
of  St.  Simon  and  St.  Jude,  and  of  All  Saints;  in  the 
service  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  where  we  pray  that 
God  may  "  preserve  and  continue  this  sick  member  in 
the  unity  of  the  Church  ;"  and  also  in  the  Litany,  where 
the  people  are  taught  to  pray  for  dehverance  from  the  sin 


14         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

of  schism.  It  is  therefore  evident  that  a  knowledge  of  the 
nature  of  unity  is  pre-supposed  ;  and  without  doubt  when 
these  services  were  pubhshed  in  the  vulgar  tongue,  the 
context  of  the  Church's  oral  teaching  filled  up  all  that 
was  needful  for  the  right  understanding  of  them.  But, 
with  submission  to  those  to  whose  hands  the  disposal  of 
such  things  is  intrusted,  I  would  venture  to  adopt,  as  my 
own,  the  wish  of  a  layman  whose  name  will  be  its  own 
sanction.  "  If  ever  a  convocation  should  think  fit  to  revise 
the  catechism  of  the  Church,  to  whose  authority  and 
judgment  an  affair  of  that  nature  ought  to  be  entirely 
submitted,  it  is  possible  they  may  find  it  necessary  to  add 
some  questions  concerning  those  who  have  the  power  of 
administering  sacraments,  and  how  they  receive  such  an 
authority,  and  what  duties  are  owing  by  God's  word  to 
our  spiritual  guides :  because  such  sort  of  instructions, 
early  instilled  into  tender  minds,  might  in  the  next 
generation  retrieve  that  respect  to  the  sacred  order  which 
we  so  scandalously  want  in  this ;  and  they  would  have 
this  further  advantage,  that  they  would  be  a  means  of 
keeping  men  steadfast  to  the  communion  of  the  Church, 
and  of  preserving  them  from  faUing  into  schisms,  even  in 
a  state  of  persecution  ;  from  the  possibility  of  which  no 
human  establishment  can  secure  the  Church  of  God, 
while  she  is  militant  here  on  earth.  And  till  this  can  be 
effected,  it  is  to  be  wished  the  reverend  clergy  would  more 
frequently  instruct  the  people  in  such  duties.  The  want 
of  which  necessary  knowledge  makes  the  principles  of 
Church  communion  so  little  understood,  that  men  are 
'tossed  to  andfro,and  carried  about  with  every  windof  doc- 
trine, by  the  slight  of  men,  and  cunning  craftiness,  whereby 
they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive.'  I  am  very  sensible  great 
modesty  hath  prevailed  upon  them  to  divert  their  thoughts 
from  this  subject,  lest  it  should  be  interpreted  a  preaching 
up  themselves ;  but  the  same  fears  may  as  well  prevent 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION.  15 

parents  from  instructing  their  children,  and  masters  their 
servants,  in  those  duties  that  relate  to  themselves."  ^ 

How  far  the  following  work  may  supply  a  definite^ 
view  of  this  great  Christian  doctrine  it  is  not  for  me  to 
do  more  than  hope.  It  is  my  heart's  desire  to  lend  a 
hand,  so  far  as  I  may,  to  the  great  and  charitable  work 
of  clearing  off  the  entanglements  by  which  the  path  of 
unity  and  of  eternal  life  has  been  well  nigh  hidden  from 
the  eyes  of  men  of  good  will. 

The  course  I  have  taken  is  as  follows  : — I  have  treat- 
ed the  subject  of  unity  in  three  aspects :  first,  its  positive 
nature,  or  what  it  is  by  the  ordinance  of  God ;  next,  so 
far  as  Holy  Scripture  will  carry  us,  the  end  and  design, 
or  why  God  has  so  ordained  the  scheme  of  our  redemp- 
tion ;  and  lastly,  the  existing  anomalies  of  the  Christian 
world,  or  how  we  may  reconcile  the  exact  doctrine  of 
unity  with  the  irregularities  which  are  visible  around  us. 
The  first  part,  therefore,  is  dogmatic  or  historical,  tracing 
out  the  doctrine  of  Unity  in  the  Catholic  Creeds,  and  in 
the  inspired  and  uninspired  documents  of  the  Church. 
The  second  part  is  moral,  but  confined  to  the  testimony 
of  Holy  Scripture  alone.  The  third  and  last  is  practical 
or  casuistical,  and  is  discussed  upon  the  principles  and 
by  the  lights  gathered  from  the  two  previous  parts,  and 
from  the  decisions  of  the  Catholic  Church. 

1)  Nelson's  Fasts  and  Festivals.    Preface,  p,  xiii. 


CHAPTER  I. 

ON   THB     A-NTIQtriTT   OiP    THE   ARTICLE,     "l   BELIEVE    IN     THE     HOLT 

CHURCH." 


Before  we  proceed  to  examine  the  intention  of  this 
article  of  the  Catholic  creeds,  it  will  be  right  to  make 
some  inquiry  into  its  antiquity. 

That  it  has  been  received  as  a  part  of  the  Christian 
Faith  in  all  churches  of  the  East  and  West,  through  the 
whole  tract  of  time  since  the  Council  of  Constantinople, 
is  admitted  on  all  hands. 

But  a  question  may  yet  be  raised  as  to  its  origin.  It 
may  be  still  asked  whether  or  no  this  article  were  in- 
cluded in  the  Creed  in  the  times  of  the  Apostles ;  whether 
or  not  they  required  of  every  convert  a  profession  of  be- 
lief in  the  one  Holy  Church  ? 

In  answering  this  question,  we  will  first  collect  the 
facts  of  ihe  case,  and  then  make  some  remarks  upon 
them,  so  as  to  lay  the  ground  for  a  definite  conclusion. 

In  the  first  place,  the  whole  Catholic  Church,  having 
united  in  reciving  the  creed  of  the  Council  of  Constantino- 
ple, has  united  in  holding  as  an  article  faith  the  doctrine 
of  "  one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,"  since  the  year 
A.  D.  381  ;  that  is,  for  about  fifteen  hundred  years. 

Our  inquiry,  therefore,  is  limited  to  the  three  centuries 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  17 

from  the  Council  of  Constantinople  to  the  first  opening  of 
the  Apostolic  mission. 

Now,  we  must  observe  that  the  Constantinopolitan  or 
Nicene  Creed  has  a  character  peculiar  to  itself,  being  the 
first  promulgation  of  the  Christian  faith  by  conciiiary 
authority.  It  may  be  called,  therefore,  a  conciiiary  or 
synodal  creed,  (symbolum  synodale.)  to  distinguish  it 
from  the  baptismal  creeds  of  the  several  Churches  of 
which  it  was  a  public  representative.  The  creed  of 
the  Nicene  Council,  although  readily  embraced  by  all 
branches  of  the  Catholic  Church,  has  never  to  this  day 
displaced  the  baptismal  creed  of  the  Western  Church, 
and  was  partially  and  by  slow  degrees  substituted  for  the 
other  traditional  forms  in  the  Eastern.  Some  Churches 
incorporated  a  portion  of  it  in  their  own  particular  creed ; 
but  the  catechetical  lectures  of  St.  Cyril,  which  were  de- 
livered after  the  closing  of  the  Nicene  Council,  are  an  ex- 
position of  the  baptismal  creed,  which  was  retained  in  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  until  the  middle  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury. Even  so  late  as  the  middle  of  the  fifth,  the  Church 
of  Antioch  still  retained  its  owm  baptismal  profession.^ 

We  must,  therefore,  refer  to  the  baptismal  creeds  of 
the  several  Churches. 

And,  first,  of  the  Eastern  Church. 

Epiphanius  has  preserved  two  creeds,  which  he  en- 
joins pastors  of  the  Church  to  teach  to  such  as  are  ap- 
proaching the  baptismal  font,  (uf'/.'/.ovTaq  rw  ay{o)  Aoitow 
noonitvai).^  In  what  particular  Churches  they  were 
used  is  not  certainly  known,  except  that  they  were  the 
Churches  of  Cyprus,  and  especially  of  Salamis,  of  which 
Epiphanius  was  Bishop.* 

1)  Observ.  in  Syirb.  Hierosol,,  p.  80.  3,  0pp.  S.  Cyril.  Hier.  Ed,  Touttee. 

2)  Epiph.  Ancoratus.  ss.  cxix.  cxx.  cxxi.    Walchius,  Bibliotheca  Sym- 
bolica,  50,  51, 

3)  Walchius,  ibid.  52,  53. 

2* 


18  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

In  the  first  (of  which  he  says  "  This  is  the  fiiith  which 
■was  dehvered  by  the  holy  Apostles,  and  in  the  Church, 
the  holy  city,  by  all  the  holy  Bishops,  with  one  accord, 
to  the  number  of  more  tho,n  three  hundred  and  ten'")  the 
article  stands  thus:  "  We  believe  ...  in  one  Holy  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church  ;"  and  in  the  other,  "  We  believe 
in  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church." 

Alexander,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  in  his  letter  to 
Alexander  of  Constantinople,  (about  a.  d.  317,)  exposintr 
the  impiety  of  the  Arians,  recites  the  form  of  doctrine 
taught  in  his  own  Church  (ravra  diSday.o^tfv  xaTra 
xtjovrrof^tiv,  ravra  rrjq  exx^-riciidq  ra  aTtoarohxci  doyfiaray 
x.  T.  A.) :  "  We  confess,"  he  says,  "  one  and  one  only 
Catholic  Church,  that  which  is  Apostolic."^ 

The  next  creed  we  may  adduce  will  have  more 
weight  for  our  present  purpose,  for  the  very  reason 
which  shakes  its  authority  in  other  respects,  being  a 
confession  of  faith,  presented,  as  it  is  believed,  by  Arius 
and  Euzoius,  when  they  made  a  sort  of  feigned  recanta- 
tion. In  the  article  before  us  it  runs  as  follows : — "We 
believe  in  one  Catholic  Church  of  God,  which  is  from  one 
end  of  the  world  to  the  other."  They  go  on  to  say, 
"  This  faith  we  received  from  the  holy  Gospels,  forasmuch 
as  the  Lord  said  to  his  disciples,  Go  ye,  and  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them,"  &c.^  This  was  doubtless  the 
creed  of  the  Alexandrian  Church,  to  which  they  desired 
reconciliation.^ 

I  have  already  spoken  of  the  creed  of  the  Church  of 

1)  Epiph.  Ancor.  cxx. :  elg  {liav  uyiav  Kadj\iKt]P  kuI  'A-iroffTo\tKr]v 
CKKKriaiav. 

2)  niav  KaX  jiovrjv  KaOo'KiKfji'  r>iv  ' Anoa^roXiKiiu  lKK\riaiavc  Theodo- 
ret,  lib.  1.  civ.  pp.  19,  20,  ed.  Reading.    Walch.  p.  49. 

3)  Socrat.  Hist.  lib.  1.  c.  26.  Walch.  p.  49.  Bingham,  Orig.  Eccl.  b.  x. 
c.  V.  s.  10. 

4)  (5(0  ■napaKaXovn^v  .  .  .  IvuixxOai  n^as  .  .  rjj  \xr\rfi  /j/uov.  Socrat. 
Hiat.  Ibid. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  19 

Jerusalem,  expounded  by  St.  Cyril  to  the  candidates  for 
baptism.  He  calls  it  "the  holy  Apostolic  faith,"  and 
everywhere  treats  it  as  the  doctrine  which  the  Church 
had  always  held  and  taught  to  the  baptized.  The  pre- 
sent article  stands  thus :  "  We  believe  ...  in  one  holv 
Catholic  Church."^ 

The  creeds  of  the  Churches  of  Antioch  and  Csesarea 
are  preserved  by  several  fathers  and  doctors  of  the 
Church,  but  only  by  way  of  testimony  against  the  Arian 
heresy.  In  their  citations,  therefore,  no  more  is  quoted 
than  was  enough  to  condemn  the  errors  against  which 
they  testified.  For  this  reason  the  third  and  last  member 
of  tlie  creed  is  almost  wholly  omitted.^ 

There  slill  remain  to  be  cited  two  very  remarkable 
documents  of  the  Eastern  Church. 

In  the  exposition  of  the  Apostles'  Creed,  by  Ruffinus, 
is  to  be  seen  a  comparison  of  three  several  forms,  the 
Roman,  the  Aquileian,  and  a  third  which  he  refers  to  as 
the  creed  of  the  Eastern  Church.  This  Eastern  creed 
is  extant  only  in  Latin, — is  almost  identical  with  the 
Aquileian  and  Roman, — was  plainly  very  much  more 
ancient  than  the  Nicene  Council, — and  may  be  taken  as 
the  representative  to  the  Western  or  Latin  Churches 
of  the  faith  of  the  Greek  Churches  of  the  East.  We 
nhall  hereafter  see  reason  to  conclude  that  the  fact 
of  its  existing  only  in  Latin  is  no  objection  to  its  genu- 
ineness. In  this  creed  the  article  stands  in  these  words  : 
"I  believe  .  .  .  the  Holy  Church."^ 

The  other  and  the  last  which  I  shall  adduce  from 
the  Eastern  Church  is,  the  baptismal  creed  recited  in  the 
book  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions. 

1)  Catech.  xviii.  32  :   £<'?  [Xiav  nyiav  Kado\iKi]v  iKKkr^ciav. 

2)  See  Walch.  pp.  40,  46.     Bingham,  b.  x.  cv.  s.  9,  11,  and  xiv.,  where 
he  shows  the  reason  of  this  omission. 

3)  RufEn.  Expos,  in  Symb.  Ap.  ad  calc.  S.  Cypriani  Opp.     "  Credo  ,  . 
Sanctam  Ecclesiam." 


20         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

It  must  be  observed  that  this  compilation  was  made 
probably  in  the  third  or  fourth  century,  but  that  the  date 
is  unimportant,  inasmuch  as  it  is  not  denied  that  the  book 
exhibits  to  us  the  outline  and  condition  of  the  Church 
from  its  earliest  times.  The  compiler,  after  giving  direc- 
tions how  catechumens  ought  to  be  instructed,  describes 
the  renunciation  of  Satan  made  in  baptism,  and  the  con- 
fession of  Christ  which  followed.  The  candidate  was 
directed  to  say,  "  I  believe  and  am  baptized  into  one  un- 
begotten,  the  only  true  God,  &c.  ...  I  am  baptized  into 
the  Holy  Ghost,  that  is  the  Comforter,  which  wrought  in 
all  the  saints  from  the  beginning,  and  afterwards  was 
sent  also  to  the  apostles  by  the  Father,  according  to  the 
promise  of  the  Saviour  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  after 
the  apostles  to  all  who  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  be- 
lieve also,"  &c. ' 

We  may  now,  in  like  manner  collect  the  suffrages  of 
the  Western  Church. 

The  first  we  will  cite  is  the  creed  of  the  Spanish 
Church,  preserved  by  Etherius  and  Beatus  in  a  book 
written  against  Elipandus.  Although  this  work  was 
compiled  towards  the  end  of  the  eighth  century,  the 
creed  recited  by  them  is  given  as  the  baptismal  creed  of 
the  Church,  and  believed  by  them  to  be  transmitted  from 
the  apostles.^  The  article  stands  thus  : — "  I  believe  .  .  . 
the  Holy  Catholic  Church." 

In  the  ancient  missal  of  the  Gallican  Church,  as  giv- 
en by  Martene,'  is  the  creed  which  was  delivered  to 
candidates  for  baptism.  The  article  runs  as  usual — "  I 
believe  .  .  .  one  Holy  Catholic  Church." 

Another  creed  used  in  the  Gallican  Church,  probably 

1)  Apost.  Const,  lib.  vii.  c.  41. 

2)  Bibliotheca  Vet.  Patr.  Gallandii,  torn.  xiii.  295.     "Sanctam  Ecclc- 
eiam  Catholicam." 

3)  De  Antiq.  Ecclesiae  Ritibus.    torn.  i.  33. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  21 

at  Poictiers,  is  preserved  in  an  exposition  by  Venantius 
Fortunatus/  who  was  Bishop  of  that  see  in  the  sixth 
century.  It  is  evidently  a  very  ancient  form,  the  articles 
of  the  Burial  of  Christ,  the  "  Communion  of  Saints,"  and 
"  Life  everlasting,"  being  omitted,  which  is  not  the  case  in 
the  later  creeds.  The  article  before  us  stands,  "  I  believe 
.  .  .  the  Holy  Church,"  which  is  its  simplest  and  earliest 
form. 

St.  Augustin  has  delivered  to  us  the  creed  of  the 
African  Church,  in  his  book  De  Fide  et  Symbolo,^  where 
the  article  stands,  "  I  beheve  ....  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church." 

Maximus,  Bishop  of  Tours,  (a.  d.  422,)  has  preserved 
the  baptismal  creed  of  that  Church.^  Its  great  antiquity 
is  evident  from  the  simplicity  of  the  wording.  The  arti- 
cle runs,  as  in  the  oldest  forms,  "I  believe  . .  .  the  Holy 
Church." 

In  the  creed  of  the  Church  of  Ravenna,  given  by 
Petrus  Chrysologus,  who  was  Bishop  of  that  see,*  the 
article  is  found  as  follows  :  "  I  believe  .  .  .  the  Holy  Cath- 
olic Church." 

We  now  come  to  the  creed  of  the  Church  of  Aquileia. 
There  are  extant  three  several  forms :  two  preserved  by 
a  writer  who  lived  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century,^ 
and  one  by  Ruffinus,  in  the  fourth,^  which  he  represents 
as  the  immemorial  tradition  of  the  Church.  The  three 
forms  differ  only  in  one  word  ;  two  having,  "  I  believe  .  . . 
the  holy  Church,"  and  one  '- 1  believe  .  .  .  the  Holy  Cath- 
olic Church." 

The  last  witness  we  have  to  adduce  is  that  of  the  Ro- 

1)  Venantii  Opp.  P.  i.  lib.  xi.  ed.  Rom  p.  377.        2)  S.  Aug.  torn.  vi.  161. 

3)  Maximi  Taurin.  Opp.  Horn.  i.     De  diversis  ad  calc.  Opp.  S.  Leonis. 
ed.  Venet.  1748.  ed.  Rom.  p.  272. 

4)  Petri  Chrysol.  Hom.  Ivii.  Opp.  ed.  Venet.  1742. 

5)  W^alch.  Bib.  Symb.,  pp.  54,  56, 

6)  Ruffiri.  Expos,  in  Symb. }  also  Walch.  ibid.  p.  37. 


22         THE  UNITY  OP  THE  CHURCH. 

man  Church.  There  are  extant  no  fewer  than  seven 
forms/  so  authenticated  by  their  relation  to  the  Roman 
Church  as  to  represent  to  us  the  baptismal  profession 
there  in  use. 

Three  of  them  are  found  in  the  Greek  language. 
Strange  as  this  fact  may  seem  at  first  sight,  it  is  capable 
of  an  easy  and  full  explanation. 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  the  custom  in  the  Roman 
and  many  other  Latin  Churches  to  recite  the  Creed  both 
in  Latin  and  in  Greek,  at  the  season  of  conferring  bap- 
tism. This  custom  was  preserved  so  long,  that  when 
in  the  darker  times  of  the  Western  Church  the  clergy 
could  not  so  much  as  read  the  Greek  character,  the 
Greek  version  of  the  Creed  was  written  in  their  ritual 
with  the  Italic ;  and,  as  Archbishop  Ussher  discovered, 
also  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  character.'^  This  last  tran- 
script is  to  be  seen  at  the  end  of  King  Athelstan's  Psal- 
ter, written  about  the  year  a.  d.  703.^ 

In  the  next  place,  one  of  the  Greek  versions  is  a  trans- 
lation of  what  we  commonly  call  the  Apostles'  Creed.^ 
This  was  also  found  by  Archbishop  Ussher.  It  is  most 
likely  that  both  these  were  received  by  the  Anglo-Saxon 
from  the  Roman  Church. 

A  third  form  is  called  the  Creed  of  Marcellus  of  An- 
cyra,  and  was  delivered  by  him  to  Julius.  Bishop  of 
Rome,  to  attest  his  orthodoxy,  when  he  had  been  driven 
by  the  Arians  or  Eusebians  from  his  see.^  This  version 
is  in  more  exact  agreement  with  the  Roman  than  with 


1)  Walch.  ibid.  pp.  56,  61. 

2)  Usserii  de  Romans  Eccl.  Synibolis  Diatriba,  p.  8.  The  interro- 
gation before  the  Creed  was  also  used  in  Greek  in  the  church  of  Poictiers. 
Sec  Maitene  de  Antiq.  Eccl.  Ritibus,  torn.  i.  p.  38.     Walch.  ibid.  p.  59. 

3)  Bingham,  Orig.  Ecc).  B.  x.  c.  v.  s.  10,  and  Ussher  ut  supra. 

4)  Walch.  Bib.  Symb.  p.  58. 

5)  Bibliotheca  Vet.  Patr.  Galland.  torn.  v.  17.  The  view  in  the  text  is 
taken  by  Arciibishop  Usslier,  and  by  Walchius,  Bib.  Symb.  pp.  56,  57. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  23 

any  Eastern  Creed,  being  doubtless  the  Baptismal  Creed 
of  that  Church,  adopted  by  Marcellus  as  a  guarantee  of 
his  orthodoxy. 

In  these  forms  the  article  stands  as  follows: — In  two 
of  them,  "I  believe  .  .  .  the  Holy  Church."  In  the  third, 
"  I  believe  ...  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church." 

Of  the  Latin  forms,  one  is  the  Creed  commonly  called 
the  Creed  of  the  Apostles,  which  has,  '•  I  believe  .  .  .  the 
Holy  Catholic  Church."  A  second  is  found  in  the  Ro- 
man Ordinal,  in  w^iich  the  article  stands  in  the  same 
words.  A  third  is  the  Creed  given  by  Archbishop  Us- 
sher  as  the  ordinary  form,  which  has,  '•  I  believe  .  .  .  the 
Holy  Church."  The  fourth  and  last  is  a  response  made 
by  the  candidate  for  baptism,  in  the  Sacramentary  of 
Gelasius,  which  has,  '*  I  believe  .  .  .  the  Holy  Church." 

Having  now  gathered  the  facts  on  which  this  ques- 
tion must  ultimately  rest,  I  proceed  to  make  a  few  obser- 
vations, after  -which  we  may  venture  to  draw  our  con- 
clusion. 

And,  first,  it  is  evident  that  a  belief  in  the  Unity  of  the 
Church  forms  an  article  in  every  Baptismal  Creed  of 
every  Church,  both  in  the  East  and  in  the  West. 

I  am  not  aware  of  any  Baptismal  Creed  extant  in 
which  this  article  is  not  to  be  read. 

And  here  I  may  make  two  remarks  to  guard  this  as- 
sertion from  objections. 

First,  there  are  to  be  found  condensed  and  oblique 
citations  of  the  ancient  Creeds,  adduced  by  the  Fathers 
for  the  special  and  direct  purpose  of  refuting  some  emer- 
gent and  partial  heresy.  In  such  cases,  a  part  only  of 
the  Creed  is  quoted,  as  the  two  first  members  were  w^ont 
to  be  adduced  in  the  Arian  controversy.  The  omission 
of  the  rest,  which  is  sometimes  marked  in  words,  (as  by 
"  et  reliqua,")  though  sometimes  not  marked  at  all,  is  no 
disproof  of  the  assertion  I  have  made.     This  will  apply 


24  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

to  the  Creeds  of  the  Churches  of  Caesarea  and  Antioch, 
and  to  some  others. 

Secondly,  there  are  certain  interlocutory  forms  of 
confessing  the  Holy  Trinity,  which  were  repeated  by 
candidates  for  baptism,  from  which  almost  all  other  arti- 
cles were  omitted,  as  the  form  in  the  Liturgy  of  St. 
James,  which  runs  as  follows : — "  I  believe  in  one  God, 
the  Father  Almighty,  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  and  in 
one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God."  But  this  would 
prove  too  much,  as  it  omits  also  the  article  of  "  the  Holy 
Ghost."^  Another  is  to  be  seen  in  the  Catechetics  of  St. 
Cyril: — "  I  believe  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Son,  and  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  one  baptism  of  repentance."^ 
But  it  is  evident  that  this  is  not  the  confession  of  faith, 
but  an  act  of  self-dedication  to  the  Holy  Trinity,  made 
by  the  catechumen  turning  to  the  East  before  he  turned 
to  the  West  for  the  ab-renunciation  of  Satan.  This  was 
the  practice  of  several  Churches :  as,  for  instance,  at 
Jerusalem,  at  Rome,  at  Milan,  and  in  the  Churches  of 
Spain,  Gaul,  and  Cappadocia.^  Nevertheless,  in  these 
Churches  the  entire  Creed  also  was  recited  by  candidates 
for  baptism.  The  self-dedication  to  the  Holy  Trinity 
was  a  distinct  part  of  the  baptismal  office.  There  is  also, 
in  the  Sermo  de  Symbolo  ad  Catechumenos,*  falsely  as- 
cribed to  St.  Augustin,  a  form  which  omits  this  article ; 
but  it  omits  also  several  other  parts,  as  the  word  "  only," 
and  "  Lord,"  in  the  confession  of  Jesus  Christ,  also  the 
session  at  the  right  hand  of  God.^  In  other  respects,  also, 
it  so  far  varies  from  the  wording  of  the  African  Creed 
as  to  show  that  it  is  not  a  baptismal  form,  and  this  is  all 
I  am  concerned  to  prove. 

1)  Walcli.  Bib.  Symb.  p.  42.    Probably  only  the  first  words  are  given  as 
a  rubrical  order. 

2)  S.  Cyril.  Catech.  xix.  9,  ed.  Touttee. 

3)  S.  Cyril,  ed.  Touttee.     Prolog,  in  Catech.  Myst.  s  viii.  p.  305. 

4)  S.  Aug.  torn.  vi.  556.  ed.  Ben.  5)  Ibid.  561,  564. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  25 

Lastly,  T  may  notice  that  the  rule  of  faith  appealed  to 
by  St.  Ireneeus^  and  Tertullian^  is  plainly,  and  even  at 
first  sight,  a  large  and  loose  recital  of  the  Evangelical 
traditions,  nearly  enough  allied  to  the  baptismal  profes- 
sion to  remind  the  reader  throughout  of  the  exacter  forms, 
but  at  the  same  time  so  visibly  informal  and  general  as 
to  disclaim  for  itself  all  pretension  to  the  exactness  of  a 
baptismal  Creed.  They  sufficiently  indicate  the  existence, 
and  represent  the  substance  of  such  a  form,  Avhile  they 
manifestly  disclaim  the  character  and  authority  of  a  re- 
cognized Creed. 

Such  being  the  three  classes  of  documents  from  which 
apparent  objections  may  be  alleged,  I  venture  to  repeat 
that  the  omission  of  this  article  in  such  documents  is  no 
disproof  of  the  assertion  that  the  article  of  the  Unity  of 
the  Church  forms  a  part  of  every  Baptismal  Creed  in 
existence. 

I  say  the  article  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  for  such 
is  the  substance  in  which  all  Creeds,  how  variously  so- 
ever they  may  be  worded,  exactly  agree. 

The  variety  of  expression  in  the  forms  above  cited 
may  be  reduced  to  the  following  classes. 

They  all  assert  the  article  in  some  one  of  these  three 
forms : — 

1.  "  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,"  as  the 
Constantinopolitan  or  Nicene;  the  Creed  recited  by 
Epiphanius,  and  the  Alexandrian,  which  adds  (^lovriv) 
"  one  only." 

2.  "  The  Holy  Catholic  Church,"  as  the  Apostles' 
Creed,  the  Spanish,  the  Galilean,  the  forms  in  the  Roman 
Ordinal  and  the  Apostolical  Constitution,  and  one  of  the 
Aquileian  Creeds. 

1)  Adv.  Heer.  lib.  i.  10.  ed.  Ben. 

2)  De  Virg.  Veland.  c.  1.  Contra  Prax.  c.  2.  De  Praescrip.  c.  13.  ed 
Rigalt. 


26         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

3,  "  The  Holy  Church,"  as  the  Roman,  two  of  the 
Aquileian  Creeds,  the  Ancient  Eastern,  the  Creed  of 
Marcellus,  the  Creeds  of  Ravenna,  Turin,  the  African, 
one  of  the  GalHcan,  and  the  form  in  the  Sacramentary  of 
Gelasius. 

There  are  one  or  two  formularies  which,  from  some 
slight  variety  in  the  combination  of  the  terms,  will  not 
fall  into  these  classes,  and  may  therefore  stand  alone,  not 
being  of  sufficient  importance  to  form  a  separate  class. 

Of  the  three  classes  above  given,  the  first  two,  which 
are  more  explicit,  are  also  later.  The  third  and  last  class 
represents  the  article  as  it  is  found  in  the  earliest  Creeds, 
and  with  this  therefore  we  have  now  to  do. 

At  present  I  need  only  conclude  that  the  Unity  of  the 
Church  is  contained  as  an  article  of  faith  in  every  Bap- 
tismal Creed  on  record. 

The  next  observation  I  would  make,  is,  that  there  is 
positive  evidence  that  a  profession  of  faith  in  the  Unity 
of  the  Church  formed  part  of  the  Baptismal  Creed  as  early 
as  the  second  century. 

The  writers  who  have  handed  down  these  formula- 
ries always  and  everywhere  speak  of  them  as  a  tradi- 
tion of  immemorial  antiquity.  The  Bishops  and  Cate- 
chists  of  the  fourth  century — i.  e.,  between  the  years  a.  d. 
300  and  a.  d.  400 — deliver  these  Creeds  to  the  catechu- 
mens as  the  same  form  of  words  on  the  profession  of 
which  they  and  their  forefathers  were  baptized.  They 
assume  everywhere  that  it  is  an  Apostolical  tradition. 

But  we  have  more  direct  evidence  than  this  general 
presumption. 

St.  Cyprian,  writing  to  Magnus  concerning  the  Nova- 
tian  schism,  (a.  d.  255,)  says,  "But  if  any  one  should  ob- 
ject, and  say  that  Novatian  holds  the  same  rule  as  the 
Catholic  Church,  baptizes  in  the  same  Creed  that  we  do, 
acknowledges  the  same  God  the  Father,  the  same  Christ 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  27 

the  Son,  the  same  Holy  Ghost ;  and  for  that  reason, 
because  he  appears  not  to  differ  i'rom  us  in  the  interrog- 
atories at  baptism,  may  therefore  exercise  the  power  of 
baptizing ;  let  such  an  objector  know,  first,  that  we  have 
not  one  and  the  same  rule  in  the  Creed  with  the  schis- 
matics, nor  the  same  interrogatories ;  for  when  they  say, 
'  Dost  thou  believe  the  remission  of  sins,  and  life  ever- 
lasting through  the  Holy  Church  V  they  lie  in  their  in- 
terrogatory, forasmuch  as  they  do  not  hold  the  Church. 
Then,  by  the  confession  which  they  make  with  their  own 
mouth,  that  the  remission  of  sins  cannot  be  given  except 
through  the  Holy  Church,  which  they  do  not  hold  to, 
they  themselves  show  that  sins  cannot  be  forgiven 
among  them."^ 

Hence  it  is  clear  beyond  a  controversy  that  the  arti- 
cle stood  in  the  Baptismal  Creed,  both  of  the  Catholic 
Church  and  of  the  Novatian  schism. 

But  we  have  in  the  next  epistle  a  direct  proof  In  the 
following  letter  St.  Cyprian  writes  : — "  The  very  inter- 
rogatory which  is  made  in  baptism  is  a  witness  of  the 
truth ;  for  w^hen  we  say,  '  Dost  thou  believe  in  life  ever- 
lasting, and  the  remission  of  sins  through  the  Holy 
Church  T  we  understand  that  remission  of  sins  is  given 
only  in  the  Church."^ 

The  next  evidence,  and  of  a  still  earlier  date,  is  a  pas- 
sage of  Tertulhan  in  his  treatise  on  Baptism.  Speak- 
ing of  the  Holy  Trinity,  he  says,  "If  by  three  witnesses 
every  word  shall  stand,  how  much  more  does  the  num- 
ber of  the  Divine  names  suffice  also  to  confirm  our  hope, 
seeing  that  we  have  by  the  benediction  the  same  as^wit- 
nesses  of  (our)  faith,  who  are  also  the  sureties  of  our 
salvation?  But  forasmuch  as  the  attestation  of  (our) 
faith,  and  the  promise   of  salvation  are  pledged  under 

1)  Ad  Magnum,  Ep.  69.  cd.  Fell.  p.  296.    Walch.  Bibl.  Symb.  p.  12. 

2)  Ep.  70.  ed.  FelL  p.  301.    Walch  p.  13. 


28  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

three,  (i.  e.  witnesses,)  the  mention  of  the  Church  is  ne- 
cessarily added,  since  where  three  are — that  is,  the  Fa- 
ther, Son,  and  Holy  Ghost — there  is  the  Church,  which 
is  the  body  of  the  three.  After  that,  when  we  have  come 
out  of  the  font,  we  are  anointed  with  the  blessed  oil."^ 
The  last  sentence  puts  it  beyond  all  controversy  that 
Tertullian  is  narrating  the  substance  of  the  baptismal 
confession  made  by  the  candidate  in  the  font. 

But  to  put  theiact  even  further  out  of  doubt,  w^e  may 
refer  to  the  full  and  deliberate  argument  raised  by  St. 
Augustinonthe  relation  in  which  this  article  of  the  Creed 
stands  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity.  After  ex- 
pounding the  Creed  at  large,  he  says  : — "  In  like  man- 
ner we  ought  to  believe  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  the 
Trinity,  which  is  God,  ma}'-  have  its  fulness.  Then  the 
Holy  Church  is  mentioned."  .  .  .  .  "  The  right  order  of 
the  confession  required  that  to  the  Trinity  should  be  sub- 
joined the  Church,  as  the  dwelling  to  tlie  inhabitant,  and 
as  His  temple  to  the  Lord,  and  the  city  to  its  builder."* 

From  what  has  been  said  we  may  safely  conclude 
that  the  article  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church  was  a  part  of 
the  Baptismal  Creed  in  Tertullian's  time,  that  is,  at  tlie 
end  of  the  second  century. 

The  learned  annotator  on  Bishop  Bull's  'Judicium 
Ecclesise  Catholicse,'  after  admitting  the  preceding  con- 
clusion, imagines  that  this  article  was  inserted  at  the  end 
of  the  first  or  the  beginning  of  the  second  century,  when 
heretics  and  schismatics  began  to  form  separate  congre- 
gations. But  this  necessity  existed  from  the  time  of  St. 
Paul's  preaching  at  Corinth,  and  throughout  the  whole 
course  of  the  Apostolic  times.^     The  next  observation  I 

1)  Tertull.  de   Bapt.  s.  6.  ed.  Rigalt,  p.  226.     Pearson  on  the  Creed, 
p.  334. 

2)  S.  Aug.  Enchiiid.  de  Fide,  &c.,  c,  Ivi.  torn.  vi.  217. 

3)  Annotata  J.  E.  Grabe  in  Judic.    Eccl.  Cathol.  ad  cap.  vi.  s.  11. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  29 

would,  therefore,  make  is,  that  no  time  can  be  assigned  nor 
any  person  alleged,  when  and  by  whom  this  article  was 
first  introduced  into  the  Creed.  If  it  was  not  in  the  Bap- 
tismal Creed  used  by  the  Apostles,  it  must  have  been  intro- 
duced at  some  time  between  the  death  of  St.  John,  about 
A.  D.  100,  and  the  birth  of  TertuUian,  about  a.  d.  150.^  If 
so,  the  name  of  the  person  who  introduced  it,  or  of  the 
Church  where  it  was  first  received,  or  the  time  of  the  in- 
sertion, or  the  cause  of  its  adoption,  would  surely  have 
been  at  least  hinted  in  the  history  of  the  Charch.  But 
there  is  not  so  much  as  the  slightest  trace  of  such 
an  event :  which  strange  silence  on  so  great  a  matter 
in  a  circle  and  series  of  so  many  Churches^  both  Greek 
and  Latin,  in  the  East  and  in  the  West,  which  must 
have  adopted  it  gradually  and  in  succession,  puts  this 
conjecture  past  all  belief. 

The  acknowledged  additions  made  to  the  Creed 
were  noted,  and  the  reasons  avowed,  as  in  the  in- 
sertion of  the  words,  "  of  one  substance,"  against  the 
Arians ;  and  indeed  in  this  particular  article,  in  the  ad- 
dition of  the  word  "Catholic,"  which  was  first  inserted 
by  the  Greek  Churches  for  the  purpose,  as  St.  CyriP  tells 
us,  of  distinguishing  the  true  Church  from  all  schismat- 
ical  congregations.  The  addition  of  the  epithet  "  Catho- 
lic" to  the  words  "  Holy  Church"  is  thus  carefully  record- 
ed, but  the  origin  of  the  article  to  which  the  addition  was 
made  must  be  sought  in  the  same  teaching  from  whence 
the  Baptismal  Confession  was  itself  derived.  Still,  in  thus 
referring  to  the  institution  of  the  Apostles,  it  is  hardly  ne- 
cessary that  we  should  refute  in  express  terms  the  story 
which  narrates  that  the  Apostles'  Creed  was  compiled  by 
a  synod  of  the  Apostles,  each  making  his  several  contri- 
bution of  one  of  the  articles  as  they  now  stand  :  the  arti- 

1)  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  Histoiy  of  the  Second  and  Third  Centuries,  p.  12. 

2)  S.  Cyril.  Catecb.    viii.  s.  26. 


30  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

cle,  which  is  the  subject  of  our  present  inquiry,  being  the 
portion  assigned  to  St.  Matthew.  This  fanciful  account 
had  its  rise  in  the  fifth  century ;  is  a  Latin  tradition,  be- 
ing unknown  to  the  Eastern  Churches  ;^  and  is  self-con- 
victed of  untruth,  as  the  Creed  commonly  called  the 
Apostles'  Creed  is  well  known  to  be  an  augmented  form 
of  the  earher  and  simpler  confession.*^ 

Having  seen  in  the  foregoing  evidence  that  all  Church- 
es consented  in  professing  at  baptism  a  belief  in  the  Holy 
Church — that  there  is  direct  evidence  of  the  existence  of 
this  article  in  the  baptismal  forms  of  the  second  century — 
that  no  baptismal  form  can  be  adduced  from  which  it  is 
omitted,  and  no  time  assigned  for  such  an  insertion,  nor 
any  intimation  that  such  an  addition  to  the  Creed  was 
made  between  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  the  first 
century,  (for  to  this  short  tract  of  time  the  question  is 
finally  narrowed) — I  conclude  that  a  belief  in  the  Unity  of 
the  Church,  however  expressed  in  words,  was  required 
of  every  candidate  for  Christian  baptism  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Gospel.  For  "  whatsoever  the  Universal 
Church  maintains,  the  same  being  instituted  by  no  coun- 
cil, but  always  retained,  is  rightly  believed  to  be  handed 
down  from  no  other  authority  than  that  of  the  Apostles."^ 

1)  When  the  Latins  at  the  Council  of  Florence  affirmed  that  their  creed 
was  composed  by  the  Apostles,  the  Greeks  answered,  /(]«£'£  ovre  e^ojicu 
ovre  eiSonev  uvfi(io\ov  tmv  Arroo-roXcoi/.  "We  neither  possess  nor  have 
seen  any  creed  of  the   Apostles."     See  Suicer.   Thesaur.  Eccl.  in  voc* 

2)  Dupin.  History  of  Eccl.  Writers,  vol.  i.  p.  378,  folio,  1723. 

3)  S.  Aug.  de  Bapt.  contra  Donatistas,  lib.  iv.  c.  xxiv.  torn.  ix.  140. 


THE    INTERPBETATION    OF   THE    ARTICLE,   "  THE    HOLT    CHURCH, 
TAUGHT    BY   UNINSPIRED    WRITERS. 


In  the  foregoing  chapter  we  have  considered  what 
may  be  called  the  history  of  the  article  before  us.  No 
attempt  has  been  made  to  attach  to  it  any  definite  inter- 
pretation. So  far  as  we  have  hitherto  proceeded,  every 
class  of  Christians,  except  ihose  who  reject  the  Catholic 
Creeds,  may  claim  the  authority  of  the  Baptismal  Con- 
fession, as  a  witness  to  confirm  each  several  way  of  ex- 
plaining the  Unity  of  the  Church.  For  in  teaching  that 
there  is  only  one  Church  of  Christ  all  Christians  agree, 
the  only  controversy  being  wherein  that  one  Church 
consists. 

I  wish  it  to  be  clearly  understood  that  in  this  chapter 
we  shall  follow  exactly  the  same  course  as  in  the  fore- 
going. 

Our  inquiry  will  be  strictly  historical.  I  shall  abstain 
with  all  carefulness  from  seeming  to  assert  what  is  the 
true  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  and  shall  con- 
fine myself  to  inquiring  in  what  sense  this  article  was 
expounded  in  the  earliest  times.  Whether  such  exposi- 
tions be  right  or  wrong  will  be  a  matter  for  discussion 
hereafter.  For  the  present  it  is  enough  to  examine  how 
this  article  was  wont  to  be  interpreted,  or,  to  use  the  same 


32  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

form  of  speech  as  before,  to  consider  the  history  of  the 
interpretation. 

The  only  point,  therefore,  for  the  reader's  judgment 
is,  whether  or  no  the  mind  of  the  writers,  herealier  ad- 
duced, be  truly  represented. 

It  will  be  both  the  simpler  and  surer  course  to  take 
first  the  direct  expositions  of  the  article,  and  next  the 
general  teaching  of  Christian  writers  on  the  doctrine  of 
the  Unity  of  the  Church. 

Of  the  direct  exposition  of  the  Creed,  the  earliest  is 
that  of  St.  Cyril.  It  is  preserved  to  us  in  the  form  of 
catechetical  lectures  to  candidates  for  holy  baptism. 
They  were  delivered  about  a.  d.  347,  before  he  was  raised 
to  the  bishopric  of  Jerusalem.  In  the  creed  of  that 
Church,  as  in  most  of  the  Eastern  creeds,  the  word 
"  Catholic"  had  been  already  inserted. 

"Let  us  therefore  speak,"  he  says,  "of  what  re- 
mains, namely,  on  the  article,  '  and  in  One  Holy  Catholic 

Church.' It  is  called,  then.  Catholic,  because  it  is 

throughout  the  whole  world,  from  one  end  of  the  earth  to 
the  other ;  and  because  it  teaches  universally  and  with- 
out fail  all  doctrines  that  are  necessary  for  man  to  know, 
concerning  both  visible  and  invisible  things,  both  heav- 
enly and  earthly ;  and  because  it  subjects  the  whole 
race  of  man  unto  godliness,  both  rulers  and  ruled,  learned 
and  unlearned ;  and  because  it  universally  tends,  and 
heals  every  form  of  sin  committed  in  soul  and  body  ;  and 
because  there  is  contained  in  it  every  kind  of  virtue 
which  is  named  in  deed  and  word,  and  all  kinds  of  spirit- 
ual gifts. 

"  It  is  called  the  '  Church'  (h.xXTjafa)  by  a  most  fitting 
appellation,  because  it  calls  out  all  men,  and  gathers 
them  in  one,  as  the  Lord  speaks  in  the  book  of  Leviticus — 
'call  together  (h.y.Xrjoiaaov)  the  whole  congregation 
(avmywyjj)  to  the  door  of  the  tabernacle  of  witness.* 


THTT    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH-  33 

Moreover  it  is  worthy  of  observation  that  this  word 
(^y.y.).riaf(xaov)  is  first  used  in  Scripture  in  this  place  when 

the  Lord  appointed  Aaron  to  the  high  priesthood 

From  the  time  that  the  Jews,  on  account  of  their  evil 
plotting  against  the  Saviour,  were  cast  away  from  grace, 
the  Saviour  built  a  second  Church  from  the  Gentiles, 
that  is,  the  Holy  Church  of  us  Christians,  concerning 
which  he  said  to  Peter,  '  And  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
Churcli,  and  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  prevail  against 

it' After  the  one  Church  which  was  in  Judsea 

had  been  cut  off,  thenceforward  the  Churches  of  Christ 
are  multiplied  throughout  all  the  world But  for- 
asmuch as  the  name  '  Church'  is  applied  to  diverse 
things  ....  therefore  the  Creed  with  guarded  care  has  de- 
livered to  thee  the  article  '  in  One  Holy  Catholic  Church,' 
that  thou  mayest  avoid  the  hateful  assemblies  (of  heretics) 
and  cleave  alway  to  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  in  which 
thou  wast  regenerated.  And  if  at  any  time  t  art  in 
strange  cities,  ask,  not  merely,  where  is  the  Lord's  house  ? 
— for  the  sects  and  heresies  of  the  impious  endeavour  to 
honour  their  dens  with  the  name  of  the  Lord's  house — 
nor  merely,  where  is  the  Church  ?  but,  where  is  the  Cath- 
olic Church  ?  for  that  is  the  proper  name  of  her  that  is 

holy  and  the  mother  of  us  all For  when  that  first 

Church  had  been  cut  off,  in  the  second,  that  is,  the 
Catholic  Church,  '  God,'  as  Paul  saith,  ^  gave,  first  apos- 
tles, secondarily  prophets,  thirdly  teachers,  then  powers, 
then  gifts  of  healing,  helps,  governments,  divers  kinds  of 
tongues,'  &c And  whereas  the  kings  of  particu- 
lar nations  have  limits  set  to  their  power,  the  Holy  Cath- 
olic Church  alone  has  a  power  without  limit  in  all  the 
world.'" 

The  next  exposition  is  that  of  Ruffinus,  a  few  years 
later  than  St.  Cyril. 

1)  S,  Cyril.  Hieros.  Cat.  xxiii.  22,  23,  24,  25, 26,  27. 

3 


34  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

"  The  tradition  of  the  faith  contains  next  '  the  Holy- 
Church.'  They,  therefore,  who  have  been  already- 
taught  to  believe  in  one  God,  in  the  mystery  of  the  Trin- 
ity, ought  also  believe  this,  that  the  Holy  Church  is  one,  in 
which  is  one  faith  and  one  baptism,  in  which  men  believe 
in  one  God  the  Father,  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ  His  Son, 
and  one  Holy  Ghost.  That,  therefore,  is  the  Holy 
Church,  not  having  spot  or  wrinkle.  Many  others,  in- 
deed, have  gathered  Churches,  as  Marcion,  Valentinus, 
Hebion,  Manichseus,  and  Arius,  and  all  other  heretics. 
But  they  are  not  Churches  without  spot  or  wrinkle  of 
false  faith.  And  therefore  the  prophet  said  concerning 
them,  '  I  hate  the  congregation  of  evil-doers,  and  with 
the  wicked  I  will  not  sit.'  But  concerning  the  Church 
which  keeps  whole  the  faith  of  Christ,  hear  what  (he 
Holy  Ghost  says  in  the  Song  of  Songs,  'My  dove  is  one, 
the  perfect  one  of  her  mother  is  one.'  "^ 

St.  Augustin,  in  his  book  *De  Fide  et  Symbolo,' 
speaks  as  follows : — 

"But  forasmuch  as  we  are  not  only  commanded  to 
love  God,  when  it  is  said,  '  thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  all  thy  soul,  and  all  thy  mind,' 
but  also  our  neighbour,  'for,'  he  saith,  'thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbour  as  thyself,'  if  this  faith  (of  ours)  does  not 
hold  to  the  congregation  and  fellowship  of  men  in  which 
brotherly  love  worketh,  it  bears  less  fruit.  We  believe, 
moreover,  '  the  Holy  Church,'  that  is,  '  the  Catholic' 
For  both  heretics  and  schismatics  call  their  congregations 
Churches.  But  heretics,  by  false  opinions  concerning 
God,  violate  the  faith  itself;  and  schismatics,  by  their 
evil  divisions,  break  off  from  brotherly  love,  though  ihey 
believe  the  same  things  that  we  believe.  Wherefore 
neither  heretics  belong  to  the  Catholic  Church,  for  that  it 

i)  Ruffin.  Expos,  in  Symb.  Ap.  ad  calc.  opp.  S.  Cyp.  p.  166,  ed.  Fell. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  35 

loves  God ;  nor  schismatics,  for  that  it  loves  our  neigh- 
bour."^ 

And  again,  in  his  discourse  De  Symbolo,  he  says, 
"  After  the  confession  of  the  Trinity  follows  '  the  Holy 
Church.'  Both  God  and  his  temple  are  set  forth.  '  For,' 
saith  the  apostle,  •  the  temple  of  God  is  holy,  which  (tem- 
ple) ye  are.'  The  same  is  the  Holy  Church,  the  one 
Church,  the  true  Church,  the  Catholic  Church,  warring 
against  all  heresies ;  for  war  it  may,  but  warred  down 
it  never  can  be.  All  heresies  went  out  from  her,  as 
worthless  branches  cut  from  the  vine  :  but  she  abideth  in 
her  root,  in  her  life,  in  her  love.  Her  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  overcome."' 

Amono^the  works  of  St.  Aiiorustin  are  three  discourses 
on  the  Creed,  which  for  a  long  time  were  supposed  to 
be  his.  The  Benedictine  editors,  on  the  strength  of 
internal  evidence,  have  judged  them  to  be  the  work  of 
some  other  hand.  They  were,  however,  manifestly  writ- 
ten about  the  fourth  century,  for  they  speak  of  the  Arian 
heresy  as  the  active  and  foremost  enemy  of  the  Church. 

On  the  article  we  treat  of  the  writer  says,  "  No  man 
can  have  love  nor  charity  who  is  not  in  His  Church  ;  for- 
asmuch as  no  one  that  is  out  of  it  can  be  with  God,  who 
is  life  eternal.  Therefore  this  mystery  (the  Creed)  con- 
cludes with  the  Church,  for  that  she  is  the  fruitful  mother, 
perfect  and  chaste,  everywhere  spread  abroad,  bearing 
spiritual  sons  unto  God,  spiritually  nourishing  her  little 
ones  with  the  milk  of  her  words,  teaching  boys  wisdom, 
guarding  youth  from  luxury  and  immodesty  by  her  holy 
chastity,  arming  young  men  against  the  devil  with  the 
strength  of  virtue,  and  teaching  the  aged  prudence,  and 
making  the  elders  venerable.  Through  her,  young  men 
and  virgins,  the  elders  with  the  young,  every  age  and  sex, 

1)  S.  Aug.  Liber  de  Fide  et  Symbolo,  torn.  vi.  161,  ed.  Ben. 

2)  Liber  de  Symbolo,  c.  vi.  torn,  vi,  554.  ed.  Ben. 


36  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

praise  the  name  of  the  Lord.  She  recalls  her  eons  from 
their  wanderings,  weeps  mournfully  for  the  dead,  and 
nourishes  without  lack  those  that  cleave  unto  her.  Her, 
my  beloved,  let  us  all  love  :  to  such  a  mother,  so  loving, 
so  provident,  so  prudent,  let  us  all  inseparably  cling,  that 
together  with  her  and  through  her  we  may  be  meet  to  be 
for  ever  joined  to  God  the  Father."^ 

In  another  of  these  discourses  the  writer  thus  expounds 
the  same  words  :  "  The  end  of  this  mystery  is  therefore 
summed  up  by  the  Holy  Church  :  because  if  any  man  is 
found  without  it,  he  will  be  an  alien  from  the  number  of 
sons  ;  nor  shall  he  have  God  for  his  Father  who  will  not 
have  the  Church  for  his  mother :  nor  will  it  avail  him 
anything  to  have  believed,  and  done  so  many  good  works, 
without  the  end  of  the  chief  good.  The  Church  is  a 
spiritual  mother  ;  the  Church  is  the  bride  of  Christ,  clad 
in  white  by  His  grace,  dowried  with  his  precious  blood. 
She  possesses  all  that  she  received  in  dowry  from  her 
Husband.  I  will  read  and  recite  the  marriage  deed. 
Hear,  ye  heretics,  what  is  written.  '  It  behoved  Christ 
to  suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead,  and  that  repentance 
and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  His  name 
among  all  nations.'  '  All  nations'  signifies  all  the  world. 
The  Church  possesses  all  that  she  received  in  dowry 
from  her  Husband.  The  congregation  of  heresy,  what- 
soever it  be,  that  sits  in  a  corner,  it  is  an  harlot,  and  not 
a  matron.  O  thou  heresy  of  Arius,  why  insultest  thou? 
why  dost  thou  scornfully  renounce  us  ?  why  for  a  time 
dost  thou  usurp  so  boldly?  The  wife  suffers  injurious 
treatment  from  thee,  the  bondwoman :  thou  loadest  her 
with  many  contumelies.  Though  she  weep,  the  Holy 
Catholic  Church,  the  spouse  of  Christ,  doth  not  greatly 
fear  thee.  For  so  soon  as  the  Spouse  shall  look  upon 
her,  thou  as  a  bondwoman  shall  be  cast  out  with  thy 

1)  Liber  de  Symbolo,  torn.  vi.  575. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         37 

children ;  for  the  children  of  the  bondwoman  shall  not  be 
heirs  with  the  children  of  the  free.  Let  her  therefore  be 
acknowledged  as  the  One,  Holy,  True,  and  Cathohc 
queen,  to  whom  Christ  hath  given  such  a  kingdom;  for 
He  hath  spread  her  abroad  throughout  the  world,  and 
cleansed  her  from  all  spot  and  wrinkle,  and  hath  made 
her  ready  and  altogether  fair  for  His  own  coming.'" 

In  another  exposition  byNicetas,  Bishop  of  Aquileia, 
in  the  fifth  century,  we  find  the  article  thus  explained. 
''  After  the  confession  of  the  blessed  Trinity  thou  makest 
profession  of  faith  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church.  What 
else  is  the  Church  than  the  congregation  of  all  saints  ? 
From  the  beginning  of  the  world  all,  (the  righteous,) 
whether  patriarchs,  as  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  or 
prophets,  or  apostles,  or  martyrs,  or  any  other  who  have 
been,  or  are,  or  shall  be  righteous,  are  otie  Church,  inas- 
much as,  being  sanctified  by  one  faith  and  conversation, 
sealed  by  one  Spirit,  they  are  made  one  body,  of  which 
Christ  is  head,  as  it  is  declared  and  v/ritten.  I  say  more, 
even  angels,  and  virtues,  and  the  higher  powers,  are  con- 
federated in  this  one  Church,  as  the  Apostle  teaches  us 
that  '  in  Christ  are  all  things  reconciled,  not  only  things 
in  earth,  but  things  in  heaven.'  Believe,  therefore,  that 
in  this  one  Church  thou  shalt  attain  to  the  communion  of 
saints.  Know  that  this  one  Church  is  the  Catholic  Church 
founded  in  all  the  world,  to  whose  communion  thou 
oughtest  firmly  to  cleave.  There  are  indeed  other  false 
churches,  but  have  thou  nothing  in  common  with  them  : 
such  as  the  Manichees,  the  Cataphrygee,  the  Marcionists, 
or  of  the  other  heretics  and  schismatics,  for  these  churches 
cease  to  be  holy,  inasmuch  as  they,  being  deceived  by 
the  doctrines  of  devils,  believe  and  act  otherwise  than 
Christ  the  Lord  commanded,  and  the  Apostles  or- 
dained."^ 

1)  Liber  de  Symbolo,  torn.  vi.  582. 

2)  S.  Nicetae  Explanatio  Symboli,  p.  44,  Romac,  1827. 


38  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

We  may  now  gather  from  the  passages  above  given 
the  general  outlines  of  interpretation. 

1.  They  assert,  first,  that  as  there  was  only  one  con- 
gregation of  Israel,  so  there  is  only  one  visible  Church  in 
the  world. 

2.  Secondly,  that  it  is  holy,  as  being  the  temple  of 
God. 

3.  Thirdly,  that  this  one  Church  is  not  restricted  to 
one  nation,  as  Israel,  but  has  received  the  dowry  of  all 
nations,  and  is  therefore  Catholic. 

4.  Fourthly,  that  it  contains  the  saints,  as  of  all  na- 
tions so  of  all  times,  and  is,  therefore,  a  body  partly  visi- 
ble and  partly  invisible. 

5.  Fifthly,  that  neither  heretics,  howsoever  nearly 
they  may  approach  the  true  faith,  nor  schismatics,  though 
they  may  hold  the  true  faith  entire,  are  members  of  the 
one  Church. 

Whether  right  or  wrong,  these  positions  are  asserted 
by  St.  Cyril,  Ruffinus,  St.  Augustin,  the  anonymous  ex- 
positor, and  by  Nicetas. 

But  as  the  earliest  of  these  writers  lived  in  the  fourth 
century,  and  as  their  expositions  may  be  suspected  of  a 
narrowness  arising  from  the  compendious  way  in  which 
it  was  necessary  to  instruct  candidates  for  baptism,  we 
will  go  on  to  examine  in  the  treatises  of  the  fathers  writ- 
ten at  large,  and  designed  for  the  fully  instructed  mem- 
bers of  the  Church,  how  far  these  expositions  are  a  fair 
and  exact  statement  of  Catholic  doctrine. 

We  will  first  examine  such  passages  as  relate  to  that 
part  of  the  one  Holy  Church  which  is  visible  in  the  world. 

St.  Irenseus  says  that  "  God  led  Abraham  and  his 
seed  into  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  which  is  the  Church 
through  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  is  given  the  adoption  and 
the  inheritance  which  was  promised  to  Abraham."^     In 

1  S.  IrensDUs,  lib.  iv.  viii.  p.  236.  ed.  Ben. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  39 

another  place  he  says,  that  "  As  Jacob  took  the  blessing 
from  Esau,  so  the  latter  people  (i.  e.  the  Church)  took 
away  the  blessing  from  the  former,  (z.  e.  from  the  Jews,) 
for  which  cause  he  suffered  the  plots  and  persecutions  of 
his  brother,  as  the  Church  also  suffers  the  same  from  the 
Jews.  The  twelve  tribes,  the  family  of  Israel,  were  born 
in  a  strange  land,  as  Christ  also  began  to  form  among 
strangers  the  twelve-pillared  foundation  of  the  Church ;"' 
and  afterwards,  '-For  the  whole  going  forth  of  the  people 
of  God  from  Egypt  was  a  type  and  image  of  the  going 
forth  of  the  Church  w^hich  should  be  among  the  Gen- 
tiles: for  this  also,  in  the  end.  He  led  the  Church  towards 
its  inheritance,  which  not  Moses  the  servant  of  God,  but 
Jesus  the  Son  of  God,  shall  give  in  possession."^  And 
the  Church  thus  prefigured  and  adumbrated  by  Israel, 
St.  Irenseus  describes  as  "  scattered  abroad  throughout 
the  world  ....  dwelling  as  it  were  in  one  house  .... 
having  one  soul,  one  and  the  same  heart ....  and  teach- 
ing with  one  mouth."  ^ 

The  language  of  Tertullian  is  to  the  same  effect.  The 
Apostles,  he  says,  "  went  into  all  the  world  and  preached 
the  same  doctrine  of  the  same  faith  to  the  nations,  and 
founded  Churches  in  every  city,  from  which  afterwards 
the  rest  of  the  Churches  borrowed  the  line  of  the  faith 
and  the  seeds  of  doctrine,  and  do  daily  borrow  it,  and  so 
become  Churches.  And  for  this  cause  they  also  are  re- 
puted Apostolical,  being  the  offspring  of  Apostolical 
Churches.  Every  family  must  be  traced  back  to  its  origi- 
nal ;  therefore  these  so  many  and  great  Churches  are 
that  one  first  Church  which  the  Apostles  founded,  from 
which  all  are  sprung.  So  all  are  primitive  and  all  Apos- 
tolical, so  long  as  all  are  one.     The  proof  of  unity  is  the 


1  S.  Irenaeus,  lib.  iv.  c.  xxi.  2  Ibid.  lib.  iv.  c.  xxx. 

3  Ibid.  lib.  i.  ex. 


40  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

participation  of  peace,  the  Balutation  of  brotherhood,  and 
the  interchange  of  liospitahty.'" 

St.  Clement  of  Alexandria  writes,  "Wherefore  I  con- 
ceive it  has  been  made  manifest  by  what  has  been  said, 
that  the  true  Church,  the  Church  which  is  indeed  primi- 
tive, is  one,  into  which  the  just  according  to  the  purpose 
(of  God)  are  gathered.  For  God  being  one,  and  the 
Lord  one,  therefore  whatever  is  most  highly  precious  is 
praised  in  respect  that  it  stands  alone,  being  a  likeness  of 
the  one  first  principle.  In  the  nature,  however,  of  the 
One  partaketh  that  One  Church  which  heresies  violently 
strive  to  rend  into  many ;  wherefore  in  its  substance,  and 
its  mind,  and  its  principle,  and  its  excellence,  we  declare 
the  primitive  and  Catholic  Church  to  be  one  only,  unto  the 
unity  of  the  one  faith,  which  is  according  to  the  several 
covenants,  or  rather  according  to  the  one  covenant  at 
divers  times,  which  by  the  will  of  one  God,  through  one 
Lord,  gathers  together  those  that  are  ordained  whom 
God  hath  predestinated,  having  known  before  the  foun- 
dation of  the  world  that  they  would  be  righteous.  Where- 
fore the  excellence  of  the  Church,  like  the  principle  of  its 
constitution,  is  in  its  oneness,  thereby  transcending  all 
other  things,  and  having  nothing  like  or  equal  to  it."^ 
In  another  place  he  calls  it  "  the  gathering  together  of 
the  elect."  3 

The  testimony  of  St.  Cyprian  is  so  well  known  that  I 
need  quote  no  more  than  one  passage  from  his  treatise 
on  the  Unity  of  the  Church. 

After  showing  that  our  Lord  singled  out  St.  Peter, 
and  made  him  a  type  of  Unity  by  giving  first  to  one  alone 
the  power  of  the  keys,  he  says,  "  For  the  inculcation  of 
Unity,  He  disposed  by  his  authority  that  the  beginning 

1  Teitull.  de  praescr.  Hseret.  c.  xx.     Opuscula.  ed.  Routh. 

2  S.  Clem   Alex.  Strom,  vii.  17.  torn.  ii.  899. 

3  Ibid.  vii.  6.  torn.  ii.  p.  846. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  41 

of  that  Unity  should  have  its  rise  in  one.  The  other 
Apostles  were  what  Peter  was — endowed  with  a  hke 
share  of  honour  and  power,  but  the  beginning  was  made 
from  one,  that  the  Church  might  be  shown  to  be  one.  .... 
The  Apostle  Paul  teaches  the  same  thing,  and  shows 
forth  the  mystery  of  Unity,  when  he  says,  '  There  is  one 
body  and  one  Spirit,  and  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one 

Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism,  one  God.' The 

Church  is  one,  which  by  the  growth  of  its  fruitfulness  is 
spread  widely  into  a  multitude:  as  there  are  many  rays 
of  the  sun  but  one  light,  and  many  branches  of  a  tree  but 
one  trunk  planted  in  the  clinging  root,  and  though  from 
one  fountain  many  rivers  flow,  so  that  there  seem  to  be 
many  several  streams  by  reason  of  the  fulness  of  the 
abundant  flood,  yet  is  the  oneness  maintained  in  the  ori- 
ginal spring.  Take  off"  a  ray  from  the  body  of  the  sun, 
the  unity  of  light  admits  no  division  ;  cut  ofl"  a  stream 
from  the  fountain,  that  which  is  cut  ofl"  dries  up :  so  the 
Church,  filled  throughout  with  the  light  of  the  Lord, 
spreads  its  rays  through  the  whole  world  ;  yet  is  it  only 
one  light  which  is  everywhere  difl'used  ;  nor  is  the  Unity 
of  the  body  severed  :  by  reason  of  its  abundant  fulness  it 
stretches  its  rays  into  all  the  earth  ;  it  pours  widely  forth 
its  flowing  streams,  yet  is  there  one  head,  and  one  begin- 
ning, and  one  mother,  teeming  with  continual  fruitful- 
ness."^ 

So  also  St.  Justin  Martyr,  in  his  d  ialogue  with  Trypho, 
speaks  of  the  visible  Unity  of  the  Church  as  prefigured 
in  the  synagogue,  and  adumbrated  by  Pharaoh's  daugh- 
ter in  the  forty-fifth  Psalm  :  "  And  to  them  that  believe  in 
Him  (Christ)  as  being  one  soul,  and  one  synagogue, 
and  one  Church,  the  word  of  God  is  spoken  as  to  a 
daughter,  to  the  Church  that  is,  which  is  formed  of  His 

1  S.  Cyprian  de  Unit.  Ecclesiae. 

3* 


42  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

name,  and  partakes  of  His  name,  (for  we  are  all  called 
Christians.)  The  words  (of  the  Psahn)  with  equal  clear- 
ness declare,  teaching  us  to  forget  the  ancient  customs 
of  our  fathers,  thus  saying,  '  Hear  then,  O  daughter,  and 
consider,'  &c."' 

And  also  in  another  place  he  says,  "  As  we  see  in  the 
body,  although  the  members  be  many  !n  number,  all  are 
called  one  body,  so  also  the  people  and  the  Church  are 
many  several  men  in  number,  but  they  are  one  Being,  and 
are  called,  and  addressed  by  one  appellation."^ 

In  like  manner  St.  Basil  says,  on  the  twenty-ninth 
Psalm,  " '  Worship  the  Lord  in  His  holy  court.'  It  is  no 
worship  which  is  offered  out  of  the  Church,  but  only  in 
the  court  of  God.  Do  not  imagine  to  yourselves  private 
courts  and  synagogues.  There  is  one  holy  court  of  God. 
The  synagogue  of  the  Jews  was  aforetime  that  court,  but, 
after  their  sin  against  Christ,  their  house  was  left  unto 
them  desolate.  Wherefore  the  Lord  says,  '  And  other 
sheep  I  have  which  are  not  of  this  fold  (avlrj),  meaning 
them  who  from  the  Gentiles  were  predestinated  to  salva- 
tion. He  shows  that  He  has  another  court  besides  that 
of  the  Jews  ;  wherefore  it  is  not  meet  to  worship  God  out 

of  this  holy  ^ourt,  but  within  it Wherefore  they  that 

are  planted  in  the  house  of  the  Lord,  which  is  the  Church 
of  the  living  God,  shall  flourish  in  the  courts  of  our 
God."3 

Parallel  with  this  are  the  words  of  Lactanlius.  Afl;er 
speaking  of  sects  which  by  unbelief  and  schism  had  for- 
feited the  name  of  Christian,  he  adds:  "That,  there- 
fore, alone  is  the  Catholic  Church  which  retains  the  true 
worship.  This  is  the  fountain  of  truth,  this  the  home  of 
the  faith,   this  the   temple  of  God,    into   which  if  any 


1)  S.  Just.  Mar.  Dial,  cum  Tryph.  sect.  C3.        2)  Ibid.  sect.  42. 
3)  S.  Basil.  Horn,  in  Psalm  .xxviii.  (al.  xxi.\.)  sect.  3. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  43 

man  enter  not,  or  from  which  if  any  man  go  out,  he 
is  a  stranger  to  the  hope  of  hfe  and  everlasting  salva- 
tion." ^ 

St  Ambrose,  commenting  on  the  works  of  the  third 
day,  interprets  the  gathering  together  of  the  waters  as  a 
type  of  the  Church.  "  From  every  valley  a  Catholic  peo- 
ple is  gathered  together.  Now  there  are  not  many  con- 
gregations, but  the  congregation  is  one,  the  Church  is 
one."^ 

Epiphanius  also,  after  quoting  the  well-known  text, 
"  My  dove  is  one,"  says :  "  For  the  Church  is  begotten  of 
one  faith,  being  born  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  only  daugh- 
ter of  one  only  mother,  and  the  only  one  to  her  that  bare 
her.  As  many  as  came  after  her  and  before  her  were 
called  harlots,  who  nevertheless  were  not  altogether 
aliens  from  the  covenant  and  the  inheritance,  but  had  re- 
ceived no  dowry  from  the  Word,  nor  any  visitation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost." 3 

Bnt  of  all  the  writers  of  the  early  Church  there  is  no 
one  from  whose  works  so  many  and  so  direct  statements 
of  the  Unity  of  the  Church  maybe  extracted  as  from  those 
of  St  Augustin.  The  greater  part  of  his  lile  was  labori- 
ously spent  in  winning  schismatics  to  the  Unity  of  the 
Church.  His  polemical  writings  were  drawn  from  him 
by  these  duties,  and  they  wear  the  form  and  exhibit  the 
impress  of  this  great  doctrine  with  a  severity  and  truth 
which  conflict  with  error  seems  alone  to  give.  The  chief 
difficulty  in  using  the  testimony  of  St  Augustin  is,  to 
know  what  to  omit  and  what  to  choose.  I  shall  give  only 
one  or  two  passages  under  this  head,  as  we  shall  neces- 
sarily return  to  his  works  hereafter.  In  his  instructions 
to  Catechumens,  he  says,  "All  those  things  which  we  see 

1)  Lactantius  de  vera  Sap.  lib.  iv.  30. 

2)  S.  Ambrose.  Hexaemer.  lib.  iii.  ed.  Ben. 

3)  Epiph.  adv.  HsBr.  lib.  iii.  torn.  ii.  6. 


44  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

accomplished  in  the  name  of  Christ  in  the  Church  of  God 
and  throughout  the  whole  earth,  were  foretold  before  the 
world  ;  and  as  we  read,  so  we  see  them  fulfilled,  whereby 
we  are  built  up  in  faith.     For  once  there  was  brought  on 
the  whole  earth  a  deluge,  for  the  destruction  of  sinners ; 
and  they  who  escaped  in  the  ark  exjiibited  a  type  of  the 
Church  which  should  be  afterwards,  which  now  floats 
upon  the  waves  of  this  world,  and  is  saved  from  drowning 
by  the  wood  of  Christ's  cross.     To  Abraham,  the  servant 
of  God,  one  single  man,  it  was  foretold  that  from  him  a 
people  should  be  born,  who  should  worship  the  one  God 
in  the  midst  of  the  other  nations  who  worshipped  idols ; 
and  all  things  which  were  foretold  as  happening  to  that 
people  came  to  pass  as  they  were  foretold.    It  was  pro- 
phesied also  that  of  that  other  people  should  come  Christ, 
the  King  and  God  of  all  saints,  of  the  seed  of  the  same 
Abraham  according  to  the  flesh,  which  He  took  upon  him, 
that  all  who  should  imitate  His  faith  might  be  the  children 
of  Abraham  ;  and  so  it  was  fulfilled.     Christ  was  born  of 
the  Virgin  Mary,  who  was  of  that  family.     It  was  fore- 
told by  the  prophets  that  He  should  sufler  on  the  cross  at 
the  hands  of  the  same  people,  of  the  Jews  from   whose 
stock  He  came  according  to  the  flesh ;  and  so  it  was  ful- 
filled.   It  was  foretold  that  He  should  rise  again :  He  rose, 
and  according  to  the  predictionsof  the  prophets  ascended 
into  Heaven,  and  sent  the  Holy  Ghost  to  His  disciples. 
It  was  foretold  not  only  by  the  prophets,  but  also  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  Himself,  that  His  Church   should  be 
throughout  the  whole  world,  spread  abroad  by  the  suffer- 
ings and  martyrdom  of  the  saints.     And  it  was  foretold 
at  a  time  when  as  yet  His  name  was  unknown  among  the 
Gentiles,  and,  when  it  was  known,  held  in  contempt;  and 
yet,  by  the  power  of  his  miracles  which  He  wrought  both 
himself  and  by  his  servants,  while  these  things  are  an- 
nounced and  believed,  we  see  the  prophecy  even  now  ful- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  45 

filled  ;  and  the  very  kings  of  the  earth,  who  before  perse- 
cuted the  Christians,  now  subjugated  to  ihe  name  of 
Christ.  It  was  foretold  that  schisms  and  heresies  should 
go  forth  out  of  the  Church,  and,  under  the  name  of  Christ, 
wheresoever  they  can,  seek  their  own  and  not  His  glory  •, 
and  these  things  are  fulfilled."^ 

In  another  place  he  says,  "  The  Church  stands  forth 
glorious  and  visible  to  all ;  for  it  is  a  city  built  on  a  hill 
which  cannot  be  hid,  by  which  Christ  reigns  from  sea  to 
sea,  from  the  river  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  as  the  seed  of 
Abraham  multiplied  like  the  stars  of  heaven,  and  as  the 
sand  of  the  sea,  in  whom  all  nations  are  blessed.''^ 

"  Hence  it  is  that  no  man  can  fail  to  see  the  true 
Church.  Therefore  the  Lord  himself  said  in  the  Gospel, 
'  A  city  built  on  a  hill  cannot  be  hid.'  ''^ 

One  more  quotation  shall  close  this  list.  Theodoret, 
commenting  on  the  forty-seventh  Psalm,  after  applying 
to  the  words,  "  The  city  of  our  God,  even  upon  His  holy 
hill,"  the  saying  of  our  Lord  that  a  city  built  on  a  hill 
cannot  be  hid,  goes  on  to  say,  "  There  is  one  Church  in 
all  the  earth  and  sea,  wherefore  in  our  prayers  we  say 
(we  pray)  for  the  holy  and  onl}^  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church,  from  one  end  of  the  world  to  the  other.  But  this 
(Church)  is  further  divided  according  to  the  cities,  and 
villages,  and  lands,  which  the  prophetical  language  calls 
habitations  (^doeiq)*  ...  As  each  city  has  within  it 
many  several  houses,  but  is  nevertheless  named  one  city, 
so  are  there  ten  thousand,  yea  innumerable  Churches,  in 
the  isles  and  on  the  continent ;  but  all  in  common  make 
up  one  Church,  being  united  by  the  harmony  of  true  doc- 
trines."^ 

Enough  has  been  now  adduced  to  show  that  the  early 

1)  S.  Aug.  de  Catech.  Eudibus,  53, 

2)  S.  Aug.  Contra  Crescon   Donat.  lib.  ii.  36. 

3)  Contra literasPetil.  ii.  74.  4)  Engl.  Tr.  "palaces." 

5)  Theodoret  in  Psalm  47. 


46  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Christian  teachers  held  and  taught  that  the  one  Church 
is  the  antitype  of  the  ark,  the  family  of  Abraham,  the 
people  of  Israel  descended  from  the  twelve  patriarchs ; 
that  it  is  the  bride  and  the  body  of  Christ — a  sole,  definite, 
visible  system,  easily  distinguishable  from  all  heretical 
and  schismatical  bodies ;  and  that  in  this  primarily  con- 
sists the  Unity  of  the  Church. 

This  will  be  more  manifest,  if  we  consider  for  a  mo- 
ment with  how  constant  and  unanimous  a  voice  the  same 
Christian  teachers  declare  that  no  heretics,  nor  schis- 
matics, are  members  of  the  one  Church.  They  main- 
tained not  only  that  gainsayers  of  the  Christian  faith 
were  cut  off  from  the  one  body,  but  also  that  they  who, 
even  though  they  held  the  whole  doctrine  of  Christianity 
in  its  soundness,  yet  broke  from  the  communion  of  the 
visible  body,  were  also  excluded  from  the  Church. 

We  may  exhibit  the  mind  of  the  early  Christians  upon 
this  point  by  referrring  to  the  works  of  St.  Cyprian  and 
St.  Augustin,  who  were  respectively  engaged  in  reduc- 
ing a  schismatical  congregation  to  the  Unity  of  the 
Church.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  in  neither  case  was 
there  any  disputed  point  of  doctrine.  The  whole  con- 
troversy turned  upon  a  breach  which  had  been  made  in 
the  Unity  of  the  CathoHc  Church. 

In  the  case  of  St.  Cyprian  a  schism  had  been  formed, 
both  in  the  African  Church  and  at  Rome,  by  Felicissimus, 
who  had  been  schismatically  ordained  deacon,  and  by 
Novatian,  who  claimed  the  see  of  Rome  against  Corne- 
lius. It  was  on  this  occasion  that  St.  Cyprian  wrote  his 
Treatise  on  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  in  which  he  says, 
''  Wiiosoever  is  separate  from  the  Church  is  joined  to  an 
adulteress;  he  is  severed  from  the  promises  of  the 
Church ;  he  is  an  alien,  a  profane  man,  and  an  enemy. 
He  can  no  longer  have  God  for  his  Father  who  has  not 
the  Church  for  his  mother.     If  any  one  who  was  out  of 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  47 

the  ark  of  Noah  could  escape,  then  he  also  that  is  not  of 
the  Church  shall  escape."' 

And  again,  in  his  letter  to  Antonianus,  he  says,  "  As 
for  Novatian  himself,  my  dearest  brother,  concerning 
whom  you  desired  to  hear  what  heresy  he  had  introduced, 
know  in  the  first  place  that  we  ought  not  even  to  be  cu- 
rious to  inquire  what  his  teaching  is,  forasmuch  as  he 
teaches  out  of  the  Church.  Whosoever  and  whatsoever 
any  man  may  be,  he  is  no  Christian  who  is  not  in  Christ's 
Church.  Although  he  boast  himself,  and  declaim  with 
proud  words  of  his  philosophy  and  eloquence,  he  that 
does  not  hold  to  brotherly  love,  and  the  Unity  of  the 
Church,  has  forfeited  even  what  he  was  before.'"^ 

In  the  same  way,  St.  Augusiin,  writing  of  the  Dona- 
tists,  says,  "  Christ  is  both  the  head  and  the  body :  the 
only  begotten  Son  of  God  is  the  Head ;  the  body  is  His 
Church,  the  bridegroom  and  the  bride,  two  in  one  flesh. 
Whosoever  agree  not  with  Holy  Scripture,  touching 
the  Head,  though  they  be  in  all  places  where  the  Church 
is  known,  are  not  iu  the  Church ;  and  again,  whosoever 
agree  with  Holy  Scripture,  touching  the  Head,  but  com- 
municate not  with  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  are  not  in 
the  Church,  because  they  agree  not  concerning  the  body 
of  Christ,  which  is  the  Church,  according  to  the  testimo- 
ny of  Christ  himself.  For  instance,  they  v»'ho  do  not  be- 
lieve that  Christ  came  in  the  flesh  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
of  the  seed  of  David,  which  the  Scriptures  of  God  declare 
most  plainly,  or  that  he  did  not  rise  again  in  the  body  in 
which  he  was  crucified  and  buned,  even  though  they 
should  be  found  in  all  lands  wherever  the  Church  is 
found,  they  are  therefore  not  in  the  Church,  because 
they  do  not  hold  the  Head  of  the  Church,  which  is  Christ 
Jesus  ;  and  they  are  not  deceived  by  any  obscurity  of  the 

1)  S.  Cyprian de  Unitate  Ecclesise.  2)  Ad  Anton.  Ep.  lii.  ed.  Ben 


48  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Divine  Scriptures,  but  they  contradict  the  most  notorious 
and  plainest  testimonies.  Also,  whosoever  believe  indeed 
that  Christ  Jesus  came  in  the  flesh,  as  has  been  said,  and 
rose  again  in  the  same  flesh  in  which  he  was  born  and 
suffered,  and  is  Himself  the  Son  of  God,  God  with  God, 
and  one  with  the  Father,  the  incommunicable  Word  of 
the  Father,  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  but  yet  so 
dissent  from  His  body,  which  is  the  Church,  that  they  do 
not  communicate  with  it  as  it  is  everywhere  spread 
abroad,  and  are  found  separated  in  some  particular  spot, 
it  is  manifest  that  they  are  not  in  the  Catholic  Church.'" 

One  more  passage  will  bring  this  to  a  most  exact  ex- 
pression of  the  primitive  doctrine. 

St.  Augustin,  writing  to  Vinceniius,  says,  ''All  the 
sacraments  of  the  Lord  are  derived  from  the  Catholic 
Church,  which  you  still  have  and  administer  as  they  were 
wont  to  be  held  and  given,  even  before  you  went  out 
(of  the  Church).  It  is  not  that  you  therefore  have  not 
these  things  because  you  are  not  there,  whence  the 
things  you  possess  are  derived.  We  do  not  change 
those  things  in  you  wherein  we  are  widi  you,  for  in 
many  things  ye  are  with  us :  for  of  such  persons  it  is 
said,  '  that  in  many  things  they  were  with  me;'^  but  we 
correct  those  things  in  which  you  are  not  with  us,  and 
we  desire  you  to  receive  here  those  things  which  ye  have 
not  where  ye  are  :  for  ye  are  with  us  in  Baptism,  in  the 
Creed,  in  the  other  mysteries  of  the  Lord ;  but  in  the 
spirit  of  unity  and  the  bond  of  peace,  above  all,  in  the 
the  Catholic  Church,  ye  are  not  with  us."^ 

From  these  passages  it  is  evident  that  the  one  Church 
had  a  certain  visible  system  of  which  tliey  that  weresep- 


1)  De  Unitato  Eccl.  c.  iv.  Tom.  ix.  ed.  Ben. 

2)  Psiilm  liv.  19  ;  al.  Iv.  18. 

3)  S.  August,  ad  Vincent.  Rogatist.  Ep.  xciii.  xi.  t.  ii.  249. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         49 

arated  from  it  did  not  partake;  and  that  this  gystem, 
whatsoever  it  be,  is  that  character  to  which  the  types  and 
shadows  of  the  ark,  the  temple,  and  the  fold  were  held  to 
refer.  It  was  evidently  something  external  and  organic. 
We  will  examine  therefore  what  was  that  condition  which 
determined  w^iether  or  no  a  man  holding  the  faith  and 
sacraments,  as  the  Donatists  held  them,  were  within  or 
without  the  Church  of  Christ;  and  with  this  inquiry  we 
will  close  the  portion  of  the  subject  which  relates  to  the 
visible  part  of  the  one  Church. 

St.  Augustin  objects  against  the  Donatists  that  they 
had  separated  themselves  from  the  Catholic  bishops  : — 
"  We  may  not  assent  to  the  teaching  even  of  the  Catho- 
lic bishops,  if  at  anytime  they  are  deceived  into  opinions 
contrary  to  the  canonical  Scriptures  of  God ;  but  if  they 
should  so  fall  into  error,  and  yet  maintain  the  bond  of 
unity  and  charity,  let  the  apostle's  saying  avail  in  their 
case :  '  And  if  in  any  thing  ye  are  otherwise  minded,  God 
shall  reveal  even  this  unto  you.'  Now  these  divine  words 
have  so  manifest  an  application  to  the  whole  Church, 
that  none  but  heretics  in  their  stubborn  perverseness  and 
blind  fury  can  bark  against  them."^ 

In  like  manner  St.  Cyprian  : — "  This  unity  we  ought 
firmly  to  hold  and  contend  for,  especially  we  who  are 
bishops,  who  preside  in  the  Church,  that  w^e  may  exhibit 
the  episcopate  also  one  and  undivided.  .  .  .  The 
episcopate  is  one  of  which  each  holds  in  full  a  common 
share. "^ 

"  Such  an  one  is  to  be  abhorred  and  avoided,  being 
separated  from  the  Church.  Such  an  one  is  perverse, 
and  sinneth.  and  is  condemned  of  himself  Does  he  think 
himself  to  be  with  Christ,  who  sets  himself  against  the 
priests  of  Christ — who  severs  himself  from  the  fellowship 

1)   De  Unitate  Eccl.  29.  2)   S.  Cyprian  de  Unit.  Bed. 


50  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

of  His  clergy  and  people  ?  He  bears  arms  against  the 
Church,  and  strives  against  the  dispensation  of  God,  be- 
ing an  enemy  of  ihe  altar,  a  rebel  against  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  for  faith  perfidious,  for  religion  sacrilegious,  a 
disobedient  servant,  an  impious  son,  an  hostile  brother, 
despising  the  bishops  and  forsaking  the  priests  of  God, 
he  dares  to  setup  another  altar.'" 

And  in  the  letter  to  Antonianus,  before  quoted,  he 
says  of  Novalian: — "  There  being  one  Church  founded 
by  Christ,  divided  into  many  members  throughout  the 
world,  also  one  Episcopate  spread  abroad  in  the  accord- 
ant multitude  of  many  bishops,  he,  after  this  tradition  of 
God,  alter  the  connecting  and  joining  together  in  all 
places  of  the  Unity  of  the  Catholic  Church,  endeavours 
to  set  up  a  human  Church,  and  sends  these  new  apostles 
of  his  into  many  cities,  to  establish  the  new  foundations 
of  his  institution ;  and  seeing  that  there  are  in  all  pro- 
vinces, and  in  every  several  city,  bishops  already  consti- 
tuted, ancient  in  age,  in  faith  perfect,  in  straits  approved, 
in  persecution  proscribed,  he  has  the  hardihood  to  erect 
other  mock-bishops  over  them,  as  if  he  could  traverse  the 
whole  world,  in  the  stubbornness  of  his  new  attempt,  or 
break  up  the  compactness  of  the  ecclesiastical  body  by 
the  sowing  of  his  discord."^ 

And  in  his  answer  to  Cornelius  concerning  the  offences 
of  Novatian,  St.  Cyprian  says,  that  after  making  a  schism 
at  Carthasre,  he  went  to  Rome,  and  strove  to  do  the  same: 
'  Severing  a  portion  of  the  people  from  the  clergy,  and 
cutting  asunder  the  concord  of  a  firmly-united,  mutually- 
attached  brotherhood.  ...  He  who  in  one  place  had  made 
a  deacon  in  opposition  to  the  Church,  in  the  other  made 
a  bishop.  .  .  .  They  cannot  remain  in  the  Church  of  God 
who  do  not  maintain  the  discipline  ordained  by  God  and 

])  S.  Cyprian,  de  Unit.  Ecclesiae.        2)   Ad  Anton.  Ep.  lii.  ed.  Ben. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  51 

the  Church,  by  the  tenor  of  their  actions,  and  the  peace- 
ableness  of  their  dispositions."^ 

And  a  Httie  afterwards  : — "  He  that  is  not  planted  in 
the  precepts  and  counsels  of  God  the  Father,  he  only 
can  depart  from  the  Church  ;  he  only,  after  forsaking  the 
bishops,  persists  in  his  madness  among  heretics  and 
schismatics.'"^ 

In  exactly  the  same  sense,  St.  Ignatius  writes  to  the 
Philadelphians  : — "  Do  not  err,  my  brethren.  If  any  man 
follow  a  schismatic,  he  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of 
God.  .  .  .  Take  good  heed  then  to  partake  of  one  Eucha- 
rist ;  for  there  is  one  flesh  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
one  cup  for  the  uniting  us  in  his  blood,  one  altar ;  as 
also  there  is  one  Bishop  with  the  presbyters  and  deacons, 
my  fellow-servants."^ 

Also,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Trallians,  he  says  : — "  In  like 
manner,  let  all  reverence  the  deacons,  as  also  the  bishops, 
as  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  the  Son  of  the  Father;  and  the 
presbyters  as  the  Council  of  God,  and  as  the  bond  of  the 
apostles;  apart  from  these  the  name  of  Church  is  not."^ 
And  "  He  that  does  any  thing  without  the  bishop,  and 
presbytery,  and  deacon,  is  not  of  a  pure  conscience."^ 

With  one  passage  to  the  same  eflect  from  St.  Irenseus, 
we  will  conclude  this  head: — "Wherefore,"  he  says, 
'•'we  must  obey  those  who  are  in  the  Church:  the  pres- 
byters, who  have  succession  from  the  apostles,  as  we 
have  shown,  w  o,  together  with  the  succession  of  the 
Episcopate,  received  the  sure  gift  of  truth  according  to 
the  good  pleasure  of  the  Father;  but  others  who  with- 
draw from  the  chief  succession,  and  assemble  in  any 
place,  we  ought  to  hold  in  suspicion,  either  as  heretics 
and  of  evil  opinions,  or  as  schismatical  through  pride,  and 
self-pleasing;  or,  again,  as  hypocrites  who  do  it  for  the 

1)  Ad  Cornel.  Ep  xlix.  ed.  Ben.        2)   Ibid.        3)    S.  Ignat.  ad  Philad. 
4)  S.  Ignat.  ad  Trail.  5)  Ibid. 


52  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH 

sake  of  gain  or  vain-glory.  All  these  have  fallen  from 
the  truth.  The  heretics,  indeed,  bringing  strange  fire  to 
the  altar  of  God — that  is,  strange  doctrines — shall  be  con- 
sumed by  fire  from  heaven,  as  Nadab  and  Abihu  ;  and 
they  that  rise  up  against  the  truth,  and  stir  up  others 
against  the  Church  of  God,  shall  abide  in  the  pit,  swal- 
lowed by  the  yawning  of  the  earth,  as  Corah,  Dathan, 
and  Abiram  with  their  followers ;  but  they  who  rend  and 
sever  the  Unity  of  the  Church  shall  receive  from  God 
the  same  punishment  as  Jeroboam.'" 

From  these  passages,  especially  from  the  last  sen- 
tence of  that  now  quoted,  it  is  evident  that  the  sin  of 
schism  consisted  in  separating  from  the  divinely-ordained 
priesthood  and  polity  of  the  Church,  and  in  usurping  the 
power  to  constitute  a  new  priesthood  and  pohty,  beside 
the  one  Church  of  Christ ;  and  in  this  consists  the  visible 
unity  of  the  one  body,  that  it  had  throughout  the  world 
a  visible  system  governed  by  rulers  ordained  of  God. 
The  universal  College  of  Catholic  bishops,  with  their 
several  flocks,  (plebs  pastori  adu7iata.)  made  up  the 
Church  of  Christ,  and  the  one  fold  of  the  one  Pastor. 

The  question  whether  or  no  any  man  were  in  that 
one  fold  they  looked  on  as  equivalent  to  the  question 
whether  or  no  he  were  subject  to  the  Catholic  pastors, 
and  in  communion  with  their  flock. 

We  have  now  examined  the  chief  points  relating  to 
that  part  of  the  one  Church  which  was  visible  in  the  world ; 
and  the  reader  will  judge  whether  or  no,  in  the  following 
summary,  the  mind  of  the  Christian  writers  whose  works 
we  have  quoted  be  fairly  represented. 

They  held  and  taught  that  there  is  in  the  world  one 
visible  body,  which  is  the  Church. 

That  its  oneness  consists  in  its  having  one  origin  :  one 

1)  S.  Iren.  adv.  Heer.  lib,  iv.  26. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  53 

object  in  faith,  one  succession  and  polity,  and  one  Head, 
which  is  Christ.     This  may  be  called  its  organic  oneness. 

That,  further,  it  is  one  in  the  spiritual  graces  of  peace, 
charity,  submission  to  spiritual  guides,  and  in  brotherly 
communion  among  the  pastors  and  members  of  the  flock. 
This  may  be  called  its  moral  oneness. 

We  have  now  to  examine  the  teaching  of  the  early 
Christians  respecting  that  portion  of  the  one  Church 
which  is  invisible.  They  believed  in  the  personal  one- 
ness of  the  whole  body,  and  taught  that  the  visibleness 
or  in  visibleness  of  its  parts  was  an  accident.  This  we 
see  at  once  from  the  answer  of  St.  Augustin  to  the  Do- 
natists,  who  charged  the  Catholics  with  making  two 
Churches,  because  they  taught  that  the  visible  Church  is 
imperfect,  the  invisible  perfect  in  holiness.  ''  The  Catho- 
lics," he  says,  "refuted  this  calumny  about  the  two 
Churches,  at  the  same  time  showing  more  distinctly  their 
meaning,  namely,  that  they  did  not  hold  that  the  Church 
which  has  a  mixture  of  evil  men  in  it  is  severed  from  the 
kingdom  of  God,  where  evil  men  shall  not  be  mingled, 
but  that  the  very  same  one  holy  Church  is  now  under  one 
condition  and  shall  hereafter  be  under  another :  that  it 
now  has  a  mixture  of  evil  men,  and  then  shall  not  have 
any :  as  it  is  now  mortal,  because  made  up  of  mortal  men, 
but  shall  then  be  immortal,  because  there  shall  be  in  it 
no  one  who  can  any  more  die  even  in  the  body;  just  as 
there  were  not  therefore  two  Christs,  because  first  he  died, 
and  afterwards  dieth  no  more."'  But  in  this  invisible 
portion  of  the  one  Church  they  taught  that  as  there  were 
gathered  in  one  the  saints  of  all  nations,  so  there  were 
the  saints  of  all  dispensations  and  limes. 

This  we  will  go  on  to  show,  as  before,  by  citations. 

The  first  we  may  adduce  is  from  the  Shepherd  of 
Hermas.     The  allegorical  form  of  this  work,  if  it  take 

1)  S.  Aug.  Brevic.  Coll.  cum  Donatist.  c.  x.  torn.  ix.  ed.  Ben. 


54  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

from  its  weight  as  an  exact  exposition  of  doctrine,  is,  for 
the  same  reason,  more  favourable  as  giving  opportunity 
for  a  full  exhibition  of  the  writer's  belief. 

After  adumbrating  the  Church  as  a  tower  built  upon 
the  water,  he  adds,  "  Hear  now  also  concerning  the 
stones  that  are  in  the  building.  The  square  and  white 
stones,  which  agree  exactly  in  their  joints,  are  the  apos- 
tles, and  bishops,  and  doctors,  and  ministers,  who  through 
the  mercy  of  God  have  come  in  and  governed,  and  taught, 
and  ministered  holily  and  modestly  to  the  elect  of  God  ; 
both  they  who  are  fallen  asleep  and  they  who  yet  re- 
main, who  have  always  agreed  with  them,  and  have  had 
peace  among  themselves,  and  have  obeyed  each  other. 
For  which  cause  their  joints  exactly  meet  together  in 
the  building  of  the  tower.  They  which  are  drawn  out  of 
the  deep  and  put  into  the  building,  and  whose  joints 
agree  with  the  other  stones  which  are  already  built, 
are  those  which  are  already  fallen  asleep,  and  have  suf- 
fered for  the  sake  of  the  Lord's  name."' 

And  in  his  ninth  Similitude  he  says,  "What  are  these 
stones  which  were  taken  out  of  the  deep  and  fitted  into 
the  building?  The  ten,  said  he,  which  were  placed  at 
the  foundation  are  the  first  age,  the  following  five-and- 
twenty  the  second,  of  righteous  men.  The  next  thirty- 
five  are  the  prophets  and  ministers  of  the  Lord;  and  the 
forty  are  the  apostles  and  doctors  of  the  preaching  of  the 
Son  of  God. "2  And  a  little  after  :  "  And  I  said.  Sir,  show 
me  this  farther.  He  answered.  What  dost  thou  ask? 
Why  did  these  stones  come  out  of  the  deep,  and  were  placed 
into  the  building  of  this  tower,  seeing  that  they  long  ago 
carried  those  holy  spirits  ?  It  was  necessary,  said  he,  for 
them  to  ascend  by  water,  that  they  might  be  at  rest ;  for 
they  could  not  otherwise  enter  the  kingdom  of  God  but 
by  laying  aside  the  mortality  of  their  former  life.     They 

1)  S  HermaD,  Vis.  iii.  s.  5.  2)  S.  Herme  Simil.  ix.  s.  15. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  55 

therefore  being  dead  were  nevertheless  sealed  with  the 
seal  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  so  entered  into  the  kingdom 
of  God.  For  before  a  man  receives  the  name  of  the  Son 
of  God,  he  is  ordained  unto  death;  but  when  he  receives 
that  seal,  he  is  freed  from  death  and  assigned  unto  life. 
Now,  that  seal  is  the  water  of  baptism,  into  which  men 
go  down  under  the  obligation  unto  death,  but  come  up 
appointed  unto  life.  Wherefore  to  those  also  was  this 
seal  preached,  and  they  made  use  of  it,  that  they  might 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  I  said,  Why,  then. 
Sir,  did  these  forty  stones  also  ascend  with  them  out  of 
the  deep,  having  already  received  that  seal  ?  He  an- 
swered. Because  these  a]-ostles  and  teachers,  who  preach- 
ed the  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  dying  alter  they  had  re- 
ceived his  faith  and  power,  preached  to  those  who  were 
dead  before,  and  they  gave  this  seal  to  them.  They 
went  down,  therefore,  into  the  water  with  them  and  again 
came  up.  But  these  went  dov/n  whilst  they  were  alive, 
and  came  up  again  alive:  whereas  those  who  were  be- 
fore dead  went  down  dead,  but  came  up  alive.  Through 
these,  therefore,  they  received  life,  and  knew  the  Son  of 
God.  For  which  cause  they  came  up  with  them,  and 
were  fit  to  come  into  the  building  of  the  tower;  and  were 
not  cut,  but  put  in  entire,  because  they  died  in  righteous- 
ness, and  in  great  purity,  only  this  seal  was  wanting  to 
them."^ 

St.  Clement,  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  says, 
"  Let  us  look  steadfastly  unto  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  see 
how  precious  unto  God  is  his  blood  which  was  shed  for 
our  salvation,  and  hath  brought  to  the  whole  world  the 
grace  of  repentance.  Let  us  steadfastly  look  at  all  gene- 
rations, and  learn  that  from  generation  to  generation  the 
Lord  hath  given  a  place  of  repentance  to  those  that  turn- 

1)  S.  HermaB  Simil.  ix.  16.  vid.  S.  Clem.  Alex.  Strom,  ii.  9.  452. 


56  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

ed  to  Him.  Noah  preached  repentance,  and  those  tliat 
heard  him  were  saved.  Jonah  preached  conversion  to 
the  Ninevites,  and  they  that  repented  of  their  sins  turned 
away  the  wrath  of  God  by  their  prayers  and  were  saved, 
ahhough  they  were  aUens  from  God."^ 

St  Irenseus,  speaking  of  Abraham,  teaches  that  he 
was  a  type  of  hoth  testaments;  '"that  he  might  become 
the  fatlier  of  all  who  follow  the  w^ord  of  God  and  endure 
the  pilgrimage  of  this  world,  that  is,  of  all  who  are  faith- 
ful both  from  the  circumcision  and  uncircumcision  ;  as 
Christ  is  the  chief  corner-stone  which  upholds  all  things, 
and  gathers  together  into  the  one  faith  of  Abraham  those 
who  in  both  Testaments  are  fit  for  the  building  of  God.'"^ 

The  same  we  have  already  seen  in  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria^ and  Nicetas.^ 

But  the  most  explicit  declarations  of  this  view  are  to 
be  found  in  the  works  of  St.  Augustin.  After  speaking 
of  the  book  of  Job,  he  adds,  "I  do  not  doubt  that  this 
was  divinely  provided,  that  by  this  one  proof  we  might 
know  that  there  may  be  even  among  other  nations  those 
who  walked  with  God,  and  pleased  him,  and  belong  to 
the  spiritual  Jerusalem,  which  we  can  believe  was  con- 
ceded to  no  one  but  to  those  to  whom  had  been  divinely 
revealed  the  one  mediator  between  God  and  man,  the 
man  Christ  Jesus,  who  to  the  saints  of  old  was  foretold  as 
to  come,  even  as  he  is  declared  to  us  as  come  already, 
that  one  and  the  same  faith  through  Him  might  lead  all 
the  predestinate  into  the  city  of  God,  the  house  of  God, 
the  temple  of  God."^ 

In  another  place,  also,  speaking  of  the  saints  before 
Christ's  coming,  he  says,  they  "  were  citizens  of  that  holy 
city,"  and  "  were  members  of  Christ's  Church,  although 

1)   S.  Clem,  ad  Cor.  Ep.  i.  7.  2)  S.  Ircnaeus,  adv.  Hser.  lib.  iv.  xxv. 

3)  S.  Clem.  Alex.  torn.  ii.  899.  4)  S.  Nicetae,  Opp.  43. 

5>  De  Civ.  Dei,  lib.  xviii.  47.  torn.  vi.  ed.  Ben. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  57 

they  lived  before  Christ  our  Lord  was  born  in  the  flesh. 
For  He  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  the  Word  of  His 
Father,  equal  and  co-eternal  with  ihe  Father,  by  whom  all 
things  were  made,  was  made  man  for  us,  that  He  might  be 
the  head  of  the  whole  Church  as  of  the  whole  body.  So 
all  the  saints  who  were  on  earth  before  the  nativity  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  although  born  beforehand,  yet 
were  united  under  their  head  to  that  universal  body,  of 
which  He  is  the  head."^ 

"  The  body  of  this  head  is  the  Church,  not  that  which 
is  in  this  place,  but  both  in  this  place  and  in  all  the  world ; 
not  that  which  is  at  this  time,  but  from  Abel  to  those  who 
shall  be  horn  even  unto  the  end,  and  shall  believe  in 
Christ :  the  whole  people  of  the  saints  belong  to  one  city, 
which  city  is  the  body  of  Christ,  of  which  Christ  is  head. 
Thus  also  the  angels  are  our  fellow-citizens :  only,  as 
strangers,  far  from  home,  we  are  toiling;  while  they  in 
the  city  await  our  coming.  And  from  that  city,  from 
which  we  are  absent  far  off,  letters  have  come  to  us, 
which  are  the  Scriptures,  dcc."^ 

And  again,  speaking  of  Canaan,  he  says,  "  There  was 
built  Jerusalem,  the  illustrious  city  of  God,  which  served 
as  a  sign  of  the  city  which  is  free,  which  is  called  the  Hea- 
venly Jerusalem.  Of  which  all  sanctified  men  who  ever 
were,  who  are,  and  who  shall  be,  are  citizens,  and  every 
holy  spirit,  even  ihey  that  in  the  highest  heavens  obey 
God  with  pious  devotion.  Of  this  city  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  is  king;  the  Word  of  God  by  whom  the  highest 
angels  are  ruled  ;  the  Word  that  took  man's  nature,  that 
men  also  might  be  ruled  by  Him,  who  shall  also  reign 
with  Him  in  everlasting  peace. "^ 

And  in  another  place,  '•  The  temple  of  God,  that  is  of 
the  whole  highest  Trinity,  is  the  Holy  Church,  namely, 

1)   De  Catech.  rud.  33.  torn.  vii.  2)  Enarratio  in  Ps.  xc.  Sermo.  2. 

3;  S.  Aug.  de  Catech.  rud.  36.     Conf.  Enarr.  in  Psalm  xxxvi.  v.  Serm.  3. 

4 


58         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  Universal  Church  in  Heaven  and  earth."'  "This 
Church,  therefore,  which  is  made  up  of  the  holy  angels  and 
powers  of  God,  will  then  become  known  to  us  as  it  really 
is,  when  we  are  finally  joined  to  it  to  enjoy  together  with 
it  everlasting  bliss.  But  that  Church  which  is  afar  off' 
from  it  in  its  pilgrimage  on  earth,  is  by  so  much  the  more 
known  to  us,  for  that  we  are  in  it ;  and  it  is  made  up  of 
men,  which  also  we  are.  This  Church  is  redeemed  from 
all  sin  by  the  blood  of  the  Mediator,  who  is  without  sin. 
Christ  did  not,  indeed,  die  for  the  angels  ;  and  yet  even 
the  angels  are  partakers  of  this  mystery,  when  any  por- 
tion soever  of  mankind  is  redeemed  and  delivered  from 
evil  by  His  death.  Since,  in  a  certain  sense,  mankind 
returns  to  favour  with  them,  after  the  enmity  which  sin 
wrought  between  men  and  the  holy  angels  ;  and  by  the 
same  redemption  of  man  the  fall  of  the  angels  is  restored ; 
and  the  holy  angels  being  taught  of  God,  by  the  eternal 
contemplation  of  whose  truth  they  are  blessed,  know 
what  number  of  the  family  of  man  the  perfection  of  that 
city  waits  for  to  fulfil  its  complement.  Wherefore  the 
Apostle  says,  '  to  restore  all  things  in  Christ,  which  are 
in  Heaven  and  which  are  in  earth,  even  in  Him.'  For 
the  things  in  Heaven  are  restored  when  the  fall  of  angels 
is  restored  from  among  mankind  ;  and  things  in  earth  are 
restored  when  men  who  are  predestinated  to  eternal  life 
are  renewed  from  the  oldness  of  corruption.  And  thus 
by  that  one  sacrifice  in  which  the  Mediator  was  slain, 
which  one  sacrifice  the  many  victims  in  the  law  figured 
forth,  heavenly  things  were  reconciled  with  earthly,  and 
earthly  with  heavenly.  As  also,  the  apostle  says,  '  It 
pleased  Him  that  in  Him  should  all  fulness  dwell  j  and 
by  Him  to  reconcile  all  things  to  Himself,  making  peace 
by  the  blood  of  His  cross,  whether  they  be  things  in  earth 
or  things  in  heaven.'  '"^ 

1)  Enchiridion  de  Fide  Spe  et  Caritate,  c.  Ivi.  torn.  vi.  218. 

2)  Enchirid.  de  Fide,  &c.  c.  Ixi. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  59 

I  will  add  only  one  more  passage :  '•  Let  no  man  be  de- 
ceived. Even  the  things  in  Heaven,  and  the  glory  of  the 
angels,  and  the  principalities  visible  and  invisible,  unless 
they  believe  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  shall  be  brought  into 
judgment.     He  that  can  receive  it  let  him  receive  it."^ 

From  these  passages  it  is  evident  that  they  believed 
the  saints  of  all  ages  to  be  members  of  the  one  Church, 
and  that  ihey  who  fell  asleep  before  Christ's  coming  were 
engrafted  into  it  by  some  mysterious  action  in  the  invisi- 
ble world.^  All  holy  angels,  and  all  spirits  of  just  men 
made  perfect,  under  Christ  their  Head,  made  up  the  un- 
seen portion  of  the  one  Church.  And  of  this  we  have 
very  full  and  striking  evidence  in  two  primitive  usages. 
The  first  being  the  commemoration  and  commendation  of 
the  departed  faithful,  which  in  all  Liturgies,  as  in  those  as- 
cribed to  St.  Chrysostom,  St  Basil,  St.  Gregory,  and  to  the 
Apostles,  runs  nearly  in  the  same  form.  In  the  suffrages 
for  the  whole  Catholic  Church  they  were  ever  wont  to 
testify  the  oneness  of  the  visible  and  invisible  parts, 
saying,  ''  Further,  O  Lord,  vouchsafe  to  remember  them 
also  who,  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  have  pleased 
thee,  the  holy  fathers,  patriarchs,  apostles,  prophets, 
preachers,  evangelists,  martyrs,  confessors,  and  every 
just  spirit  made  perfect  in  the  faith  of  Christ."^ 

The  other  usage  to  which  I  refer  shows  that  they  be- 
lieved the  visible  part  to  have  not  only  union,  but  com- 
munion of  energy  and  worship  with  the  part  invisible. 
In  the  same  Eucharistical  office  was  always  used  the 
Seraphic  Hymn  or  Trisagium,  in  which  the  earthly  and 
heavenly  Church  were  believed  to  join.  The  follow- 
ing passages  will  represent  ihe  common  faith  of  the  early 
teachers  on  this  point.  Speaking  of  this  hjmin,  St. 
Chrysostom    says,    "  Know   ye  this   voice  ?      Whether 

1)  S.  Ignat.  ad  Smyrnseos. 

2)  S.  Cyril.  Hier.  Cat.  xiii.  31,  and  S.  Hermas,  ut  supra,  p.  59. 
3;   Liturg.  S.  Basil.  Opp.  torn.  ii.  p.  630. 


60         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

it  is  ours  or  the  seraphim's  ?  Both  ours  and  the  sera- 
phim's through  Christ,  who  hath  taken  away  the  mid- 
dle wall  of  partition,  and  reconciled  things  in  Hea- 
ven and  things  in  earth,  making  both  one.  For  afore- 
time this  hymn  was  sung  in  Heaven  alone ;  but  w^hen 
the  Lord  vouchsafed  to  come  down  on  earth  he  brought 
down  to  us  also  this  melody.  Wherefore  the  chief  priest, 
(i.  e.  the  Bishop,)  when  he  stands  at  the  holy  table,  offer- 
ing the  reasonable  service,  and  making  oblation  of  the 
unbloody  sacrifice,  does  not  merely  call  us  to  this  chant, 
but  after  naming  the  cherubim  and  seraphim,  then  ex- 
horts every  one  to  send  forth  this  awful  song,  drawing 
our  thoughts  from  the  earth  by  the  remembrance  of  those 
that  chant  with  us,  and  almost  crying  to  each  of  us  and 
Baying,  'Thou  singest  with  the  seraphim,  stand  then 
with  the  seraphim,  spread  thy  wings  with  them,  with 
them  hover  round  the  royal  throne.'"^  They  believed 
that  the  acts  of  homage  and  adoration  offered  by  the 
visible  were  asisted  by  the  invisible  members  of  the 
Church ;  that  they  bore  a  part  in  all  the  ghostly  energies 
of  that  body  of  which  the  Church  militant  is  the  lower 
portion,  and  Christ  the  common  Head. 

It  would  be  very  easy  to  multiply,  to  an  indefinite  ex- 
tent, passages  w^hich  bear  upon  the  points  under  consider- 
ation. But  knowing  how  irksome  it  is  to  read  over  a 
series  of  quotations,  I  have  endeavoured  to  make  them 
as  few  as  possible.  With  this  view  I  have  used  the  best 
judgment  I  was  able  in  selecting  such  as  seemed  clear 
enough  to  exhibit  the  mind  of  the  early  Church. 

Once  more,  let  me  remind  the  reader  that  the  only 
point  in  which  he  need  as  yet  apply  his  critical  skill  is, 
whether  or  no  the  fbllowing  summary  be  a  fair  and  exact 
representation  of  the  sense  of  the  writers  here  adduced. 

It  would  seem  that  they  believed  the  one  Church  to  con- 

1)  S.  Chrys.  Horn.  vi.  in  Esai.  t.  iii.  890. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


61 


sist  of  the  body  of  faithful  of  all  nations  and  of  all  ages, 
gathered  under  Christ  their  Head  ;  and  that  of  this  body- 
there  are  two  parts,  one  visible  and  one  invisible,  between 
which  there  nevertheless  subsists  the  most  strict  and  en- 
ergetic personal  union :  that  the  invisible  part  is  perfect 
and  admitted  into  the  fellowship  of  the  angels ;  and  the 
visible  imperfect,  having  in  it  a  mixture  of  evil  men,  and 
that  its  unity  is  twofold,  organic  in  its  origin  and  polity, 
and  moral  in  peace  and  charity  ;  the  visible  mark  or  cha- 
racter of  unity  being  communion  with  pastors  deriving 
lawful  succession  from  the  Apostles  of  Christ. 


^t^' 


CHAPTER    III. 


THE    UNITY    OF   THE    CHCTBCH   AS    TAUGHT   IN   HOLT  SCRIPTURE. 


Hitherto  I  have  attempted  only  to  ascertain  in  what 
sense  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity  of  the  Church  was  held 
in  the  first  ages.  If  I  have  faithfullj'^  exhibited  the  mind 
of  the  early  teachers  of  Christ's  Gospel,  I  have  fulfilled 
the  work  I  undertook.  Whether  that  doctrine  which  has 
been  exhibited  be  true  or  not  is  a  further  question,  on 
which  I  have  as  yet  made  no  assertion.  Henceforward  I 
shall  endeavour  to  show  by  a  course  of  direct  argument 
what  is  the  doctrine  of  Unity  as  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ. 
If  the  conclusion  to  which  our  reasoning  may  ultimately 
lead  us  should  be  found  to  coincide  with  the  doctrine 
stated  in  the  last  chapter,  it  will  of  course  amount  to  an 
independent  proof  that  the  same  doctrine  is  true.  I  say 
independent ;  for  it  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that, 
even  though  the  arguments  of  this  present  chapter  should 
appear  inconclusive,  the  statements  in  the  last  constitute 
a  distinct  and  separate  fact,  which,  if  supposed  to  be  un- 
true, must  be  explained  away  or  accounted  for. 

I  will,  however,  assert  nothing  upon  the  witness  of 
the  early  Church.  I  will  not  as  yet  use  it  even  for  the 
enunciation  of  our  present  argument.  But,  as  we  have 
ascertained  by  detailed  examination  what  was  the  doc- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


m 


trine  of  Unity  taught  by  the  uninspired  writers,  we  will 
now  follow  exactly  the  same  course  with  the  inspired 
teachers  of  the  Church.  The  whole  of  this  chapter, 
therefore,  will  rest  upon  the  canonical  books  of  Scripture. 

That  the  Unity  of  the  Church  in  some  sense  is  a  doc- 
trine of  Holy  Scripture  every  Christian  man  admits.  So 
far  there  is  no  controversy.  In  what  sense  this  Unity  is 
to  be  believed,  whether  as  wholly  visible  and  outward, 
or  wholly  inward  and  invisible,  or  in  a  mixed,  various, 
and  changeable  shape — this  is  the  only  dispute.  It  is 
plain,  therefore,  that  if  the  text  of  Holy  Scripture  can  be 
variously  interpreted,  every  man  will  claim  its  witness 
for  himself,  as  every  several  man  believes  the  eye  of  a 
picture  to  be  fixed  on  him  alone.  But  it  is  obvious  that 
to  call  any  proposition  alleged  from  Scripture  a  proof 
from  Scripture,  until  it  is  first  proved  to  be  the  right 
sense  of  Scripture,  is  only  to  beg  the  question  at  every 
step.  The  point  at  issue  is  plainly  this  :  of  many  appa- 
rent senses  of  Scripture,  which  is  the  true  ?  He  that  has 
it  has  Scripture  on  his  side,  and  he  only. 

I  am  aware,  therefore,  that  in  professing  to  derive  the 
proof  of  this  chapter  from  Holy  Scripture,  I  lay  myself 
open  to  the  preliminary  objection,  that  the  words  of  Scrip- 
ture are  not  proof  from  Scripture  till  I  have  proved  that 
they  are  adduced  according  to  the  mind  and  intention  of 
the  writer.  This,  therefore,  is  the  real  point.  Every 
thoughtful  man  will  admit  that  although,  in  the  manifold 
wisdom  of  God,  His  Word  may  have,  as  it  were,  many 
sides,  and  every  saying  of  it  many  aspects,  yet  it  can  only 
be  so  as  any  perfect  though  complex  figure  may  have  a 
multitude  of  harmonizing  lines,  with  an  absolute  unity. 
It  savours,  therefore,  rather  of  shallowness  and  incoher- 
ence to  hear  men  say  that  Holy  Scripture  has  passages 
of  a  discrepant  and  various  kind.  God  cannot  belie  him- 
self.   In  the  Divine  mind  all  the  ideas  of  eternal  truth  lie 


64         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

in  perfect  harmony  ;  and  all  their  reflections  on  the  page 
of  Holy  Writ  are  likewise  of  one  accord.  Scattered  and 
divergent  as  they  may  seem  to  our  eyes,  there  is  a  point 
of  sight  at  which  we  shall  see  them  all  rise  and  blend 
into  the  oneness  and  harmony  of  light. 

Many,  therefore,  as  may  be  the  apparent  senses  of 
Scripture,  there  can  be  but  one  true  sense.  Many  as 
may  be  the  apparent  arguments  and  deductions  from 
these  apparent  senses,  there  can  be  but  one  true  argu- 
ment and  conclusion  from  Holy  Writ.  And  this  we  will 
endeavour  to  ascertain  in  the  article  of  the  Unity  of  the 
Church. 

I  shall,  therefore,  on  every  point,  first  adduce  the 
words  of  Scripture. 

Next,  in  the  event  of  doubt  as  to  the  right  interpreta- 
tion of  any  passage,  I  shall  adduce  such  other  passages 
of  Holy  Scripture  as  may  determine  its  sense. 

And,  lastly,  should  the  interpretation  be  still  doubtful, 
I  shall  ascertain  in  what  sense  the  early  uninspired 
vn-iters  of  the  Church  received  it.  I  shall  use  them, 
therefore,  not  as  primary,  but  as  corroborating  witnesses, 
and  shall  leave  for  candid  minds  to  estimate  the  relative 
weight  of  interpretations,  of  which  the  one  shall  have  the 
authority  of  some  few,  and  those  modern  teachers,  or  it 
may  be  only  of  an  individual  mind,  and  the  other  the 
assent  and  corroboration  of  Christians  from  the  earliest 
traceable  antiquity.  Of  such  an  interpretation,  if  we 
may  not  at  once  assert  that  it  must  be  right,  we  may  at 
least  believe  that  it  is  in  harmony  with  the  Catholic  faith, 
and  may  be,  as  it  has  been,  held  without  blame  by  the 
most  devoted  servants  of  God. 

Ever  since  the  fall  of  man  there  has  been  in  the  world 

a  fellowship  of  God's  faithful  servants.     In  the  universal 

sinfulness  of  mankind,  before  the  flood,  there  was  one 

araily,  which  still  clave  to  God.    In  the  second  declension 


i 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  65 

from  God,  which  followed  after  the  flood,  there  was  yet  a 
remnant.  When  chosen  by  the  free  grace  of  God,  and 
called  out  of  the  midst  of  an  idolatrous  land  and  kindred, 
the  family  of  Abraham  alone  was  found  faithful.  When 
this  family  had  grown  into  a  tribe,  and  from  a  tribe  into 
a  nation,  God  was  pleased  to  superadd  the  tokens  and 
signatures  of  a  visible  polity  and  priesthood.  Thence- 
forward Israel  was  among  nations  a  "  kingdom  of  priests," 
a  visible  witness  for  God.  After  the  various  fortunes  of 
fifteen  hundred  years,  through  which  the  visible  national 
identity  of  Israel  was  preserved  by  the  Divine  Providence, 
God  was  pleased  to  continue  the  same  visible  witness  of 
Himself  in  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  Jewish  Church 
was  a  typical  Church  so  far  as  it  was  Jewish,  that  is,  the 
national  Israel  was  a  figure  of  the  spiritual,  of  "  the  Israel 
of  God  ;"  but  it  was  a  real  Church  in  so  far  as  it  was  the 
stock  on  which  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ  was  grafted. 
It  is  probable,  therefore,  that  from  the  time  of  Noah,  sup- 
posing a  visible  line  from  Noah  to  Abraham,  and  certain 
that  from  the  time  of  Abraham,  there  has  been  in  the 
world  one,  and  one  only  body,  a  family,  a  nation,  a  Ca- 
tholic fellowship,  which,  through  the  knowledge  of  God 
revealed  to  it  alone,  has  I'ulfiUed  the  office  ascribed  to  it 
by  St.  Peter :  "  Ye  are  a  chosen  generation,  a  royal 
priesthood,  a  peculiar  people,  a  holy  nation,  to  show  forth 
the  praises  of  Him  that  hath  called  you  out  of  darkness 
into  his  marvellous  light." 

At  this  day  there  is  in  the  world  a  great  visible  wit- 
ness for  God,  namely,  the  whole  of  Christendom.  There 
are  not  two  Christendoms,  but  one  only ;  and  in  it  alone 
is  to  be  found  the  true  knowledge  of  God  revealed  to 
mankind  by  His  Son  Jesus  Christ.  In  this  sense  of  Unity, 
which  is  plainly  deducible  from  Scripture,  all  will  readily 
agree. 

We  may  remark  further,  that  as  this  visible  body  has 
4* 


66         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

had  three  distinct  stages  or  phases  of  development,  the 
patriarchal,  the  national,  and  the  Cathohc,  so  under  each 
several  condition  it  has  borne  a  distinct  and  visible  char- 
acter. 

It  has  always  been  constituted  as  a  society,  of  which 
the  two  main  conditions  were  subordination  and  charity, 
the  two  main  relations  of  sonship  and  brotherhood.  This 
was  the  structure  of  the  patriarchal  family,  of  which 
there  was  always  one  head  by  devolution  of  the  right  of 
primogeniture,  and  one  body  of  many  members.  To- 
wards this  head  was  the  duty  of  subordination  as  of  sons 
to  a  father,  and  towards  the  members  of  the  body,  of 
charity  as  of  brethren  one  to  another. 

But  when  this  family  multiplied  into  a  nation  this 
organized  system  Avas  more  strongly  developed.  The 
bonds  of  relation  by  kindred  were  so  lengthened  out  as 
to  lose  in  the  closeness  of  their  hold,  therefore  God 
strengthened  them  by  a  direct  institution.  A  stronger 
hand  was  needed  to  wield  a  nation  than  a  family.  For  a 
people  of  twelve  tribes,  a  more  visible  structure  and  a 
more  consolidated  polity  was  needful.  And  at  this  time 
we  find  a  lawgiver  and  a  priest  ordained  by  God  himself, 
the  one  to  be  for  ever  represented  by  the  succession  of 
the  priesthood,  the  other  by  the  judges  and  the  kings. 

The  civil  and  sacerdotal  polity  of  the  Jewish  nation 
is  so  legible  in  every  part  of  Holy  Writ,  that  no  one  has 
ever  called  it  into  doubt:  the  only  question  that  can  be 
raised  is,  whether  that  polity  was  an  economy  to  meet 
the  temporary  condition  of  a  particular  people,  or  an  in- 
stitution of  Divine  wisdom  necessary  to  the  well-being 
of  mankind,  and  therefore  designed  to  continue  in  the 
Christian  Church  through  all  ages,  to  the  end  of  the 
world. 

And,  first,  it  will  be  well  to  remark  on  the  nature  of 
the  chief  types  by  which  the  Catholic  Church  was  fore- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  67 

shadowed.  The  earliest  is  the  ark  of  Noah  ;  the  most 
visible,  the  family  of  Abraham  and  the  nation  of  Israel. 
In  both  these  we  see  not  more  the  character  of  unity  than 
of  structure  and  organization.  The  ark  was  built  by  the 
express  and  detailed  instruction  of  God :  the  distinctive 
features  of  the  Jewish  economy  were  of  divine  institu- 
tion, from  the  seal  of  the  Covenant  given  to  Abraham,  to 
the  pattern  shown  to  Moses  in  the  Mount.  k 

It  is  plain,  then,  that  part  of  the  moral  instruction  of 
these  types  was  to  foreshadow  a  coming  mystery,  the 
prominent  character  of  which  should  be  a  structure  and 
an  organization  instituted  by  God  himself 

The  same  may  be  traced  in  the  language  of  the  pro- 
phets: as  where  Daniel  passes  from  the  four  visible  em- 
pires to  a  fifth,  which  is  the  visible  Kingdom  of  God ; 
where  Isaiah  foretells  the  peace  of  the  Church,  under  the 
image  of  a  city  built  of  precious  stones ;  in  the  whole 
implied  meaning  of  the  words,  "  Behold,  I  lay  in  Sion,  for 
a  foundation,  a  stone,  a  tried  stone,  a  precious  corner- 
stone, a  sure  foundation;'"  and  in  the  head  stone,  which 
in  due  time  should  be  brought  forth  with  shouting.^  All 
these  foreshadow  a  structure  or  polity. 

Other  types  (such  as  the  stone  which  grew  into  a  great 
mountain,  in  the  vision  seen  by  Daniel,  and  the  figurative 
language  of  the  Psalms  and  Song  of  Songs,  where  the 
Church  is  spoken  of  as  the  beloved  and  the  bride)  are 
designed  to  express  Unity,  together  with  some  character- 
istic attribute,  such  as  growth  and  extension,  or  purity 
and  intense  cleaving  of  love  to  Christ  the  Spouse.  But 
as  these  bring  out  each  one  some  peculiar  property  of  the 
Church,  so  do  the  ark  and  the  people  of  Israel  and  the 
like  bespeak  an  organized  system. 

We  may  add  to  these  the  parables  of  our  Lord,  in 
which  the  Church  is  everywhere  typified  as  one  organized 

1)  Isaiah  xxviii.  16.  2)  Zech.  iv.  7 


68         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

body  :  as  for  instance,  those  in  which  He  likened  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven  to  an  household,  to  a  net,  to  a  grain  of 
mustard  seed,  to  a  vine.  In  all  these  continuity  of  parts 
and  unity  of  structure  are  distinctly  adumbrated.  To  the 
same  effect  also  are  our  Lord's  words,  when  He  applied 
to  Himself  the  prophecy  of  the  stone  which  the  builder 
refused  ;  and  when  He  said  to  Simon,  "  Thou  art  Peter, 
and  upon  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church."  All  these 
things  would  prepare  us  for  some  visible  organized  sys- 
tem instituted  by  God  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  types,  and 
ordained  in  the  stead  of  His  former  economies. 

Now  if  we  examine  Holy  Scripture  simply  as  an  au- 
thentic historical  document,  in  which  the  beginnings  of 
the  Church  are  narrated,  we  shall  find, — 

First,  that  by  the  baptism  of  St.  John  Baptist  a  body 
of  people  was  gathered  together  for  the  service  of  the 
Messiah.  What  the  circumcision  of  Abraham  was  to  the 
Mosaic  pohty,  the  baptism  of  St.  John  was  to  the  Church 
of  Christ.  Next,  by  the  baptism  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
the  first  foundations  of  the  Church  were  laid.  ''  Then 
they  that  gladly  received  his  (Peter's)  word  were  bap- 
tized ;  and  the  same  day  there  were  added  unto  them 

about  three  thousand  souls And  they  continued 

steadfastly  in  the  Apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  and 
in  breaking  of  bread,  and  in  prayers.  And  the  Lord 
added  to  the  Church  daily  such  as  should  be  saved."^ 
This  is  the  first  time  we  read  of  the  Church  as  a  body 
already  in  being.  Our  Lord  had  plainly  spoken  of  it  in 
His  benediction  to  St.  Peter, '^  but  He  spoke  of  it  in  promise 
and  in  prophecy.  As  yet  it  did  not  exist.  But  in  the 
book  of  Acts  we  find  His  words  rising  up  into  a  reality. 
The  Church  had  passed  into  being.  The  faithful  rem- 
nant were  knit  into  one  body,  compacted  by  one  faith  and 
one  common  bond  of  baptism  into  Christ.     And  thence- 

1)  Acts  ii.  41,  42,  47.  2)  St.  Matth.  xvi.  18  5  xviii.  17. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  69 

forward  the  Church  is  spoken  of  as  a  phenomenon  well 

/    known,  and  as  a  body  conspicuously  visible.     It  was  a 

/     community  existing  in  Jerusalem,  and  worshipping  in  the 

/     temple  ;  and  yet  so  distinct  from  the  polity  and  system 

'      of  the  Jews,  as  to  admit  its  members  by  a  formal  seal  of 

initiation  in  the  Name  of  God.     The  Apostles  baptized 

out  of  God's  elder  system  into  the  new.     From  this  time 

we  find  persecution  arising  against  "  the  Church  ;"  Saul 

making  havock  of  "  the  Church  ;"  prayer  being  made  for 

Peter  by  "  the  Church  ;"  Herod  vexing  certain  of  "  the 

Church.'" 

And,  again,  we  read  of  the  Apostles  ordaining  elders 
in  every  Church  ;  of  the  Churches  throughout  all  Judea 
having  rest;  of  Paul  going  throughout  Syria  confirming 
the  Churches;  of  the  Churches  being  established  in  the 
faith.  And  throughout  the  New  Testament  Scripture, 
in  more  than  a  hundred  places,  "  the  Church"  is  in  like 
manner  spoken  of 

It  is  plain  that  this  refers  to  some  one  visible  organized 
system,  having  unity  in  plurality,  and  being  therefore 
spoken  of  as  existing  at  one  and  the  same  time,  in  one 
and  in  many  places.  And  therefore  the  Apostolic  Epis- 
tles bear  the  name  and  address  of  each  several  Church, 
and  to  the  ChurcJi  in  each  several  place  ;  and  the  Church 
is  spoken  of  as  in  the  house  of  Chloe,  or  of  Gains,  of  Phi- 
lemon, and  Nymphas,  and  the  like.  But  this  is  enough 
to  show  that  by  "  the  Church"  was  intended  some  newly 
developed  system,  which  at  that  time  began  to  take  the 
place  of  God's  previous  economies,  and  to  overspread 
both  Judea  and  the  countries  round  about.  Thus  far  we 
have  evidence  rather  of  the  fact,  that  such  a  system  was 
then  founded,  than  of  the  kind  and  nature  of  the  system 
itself  We  see  that  it  was  a  visible  substantive  body, 
united  by  symbolical  bonds,  and  differenced  from  all  other 

1)  Acts  viii.  1,  3  :  xii.  1,  5. 


70  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

communities  partly  by  the  rejection  of  their  respective 
characteristics,  and  partly  by  the  peculiar  nature  of  its 
own. 

We  will  now  examine  what  the  inspired  writers  taught 
concerning  the  nature  of  the  Church. 

They  explain  its  nature  chiefly  by  the  use  of  two  meta- 
phors— a  building  and  a  body. 

St.  Paul  draws  a  direct  parallel  between  the  Church 
of  the  Jews  and  the  Church  of  Christians.  "  Every  house 
is  builded  by  some  man,  but  He  that  built  all  things  is 
God.  And  Moses  verily  was  faithful  in  all  his  house  as 
a  servant,  for  a  testimony  of  those  things  which  were  to 
be  spoken  after.  But  Christ  as  a  Son  over  His  own 
house,  whose  house  are  we."^  As  he  says  to  the  Corinth- 
ians, "Ye  are  God's  building;'"^  and  again,  "Know  ye 
not  that  ye  are  the  temple  of  God  ;"^  and  "  the  temple  of 
God  is  holy,  which  temple  ye  are."^  "  Your  body  is  the 
temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost."^  "  Ye  are  the  temple  of  the 
living  God."^  "  Unto  whom  coming,"  says  St.  Peter,  "  as 
unto  a  living  stone,  disallowed  indeed  of  men,  but  chosen 
of  God  and  precious.  Ye  also,  as  lively  stones,  are  built 
up  a  spiritual  house."^  Again,  St.  Paul  says,  "Ye  are 
no  more  strangers  and  foreigners,  but  fellow-citizens  with 
the  saints,  and  of  the  household  of  God,  and  are  built 
upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus 
Christ  Himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone,  in  whom  all 
the  building,  fitly  framed  together,  groweth  unto  an  holy 
temple  in  the  Lord  :  in  whom  ye  also  are  builded  together 
for  a  habitation  of  God  through  the  Spirit."^ 

In  these  passages  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter  teach  us  that 
what  the  temple  in  Jerusalem  was  to  the  Divine  presence 


1)   Heb.  iii.  4,  5,  6.  2)   1  Cor.  iii.  9.  3)   1  Cor.  iii.  16. 

4)   1  Cor.  iii.  17.  5)   1  Cor.  vi.  19.  6)  2  Cor.  vi.  16. 

7)   1  St.  Pet.  ii.  4,  5.  8)   Ephes.  ii.  19,  23. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  71 

which  dwelt  in  it,  the  fellowship  of  Christians  is  now  to 
the  indwelling  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  Jewish  temple  was  a  type,  being  a  structure  of 
dead  matter  made  with  hands  ;  the  Church  of  Christ  the 
antitype,  being  an  aggregation  of  living  and  spiritual  na- 
tures gathered  into  one,  and  held  together  in  the  same 
relation  to  Christ,  the  head  corner-stone. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  raise  a  question  w^hether  or  no 
from  this  passage  the  visible  Unity  of  the  Church  is  to  be 
proved,  although  it  would  seem  that  a  congregation  of 
living  men  is  as  visible  an  object  as  a  pile  of  lifeless 
stones.  Let  us  take  only  what  all  admit.  Let  us  say 
that  these  passages  prove  only  the  spiritual  and  invisible 
Unity  of  the  Church.  Now  no  man  can  deny  that  the 
type  of  a  building  or  temple  shadows  forth  the  properties 
of  structure,  and  mutual  relation  of  parts,  and  therefore 
of  order  and  combination  on  some  common  principle  no 
less  than  of  unity.  Nay,  I  think,  candid  reasoners  will 
admit  these  to  be  the  chief  and  prominent  ideas  express- 
ed by  the  analogy.  However,  for  our  present  argument, 
it  is  enough  that  these  be  admitted  as  features  in  the 
prophetic  types  and  in  the  language  of  the  apostles. 

The  other  figure  commonly  used  by  St.  Paul  to  ex- 
press the  nature  of  Christ's  Church,  is  that  of  a  body. 

To  the  Ephesians  he  says,  that  God  "  hath  put  all 
things  under  His  feet,  and  gave  him  to  be  the  head  over 
all  things  to  the  Church,  whith  is  His  body,  the  fulness  of 
Him  that  filleth  all  in  all.'"^  And  to  the  Colossians,  "  He 
is  the  head  of  the  body,  the  Church  j'"^  and  a  little  after- 
wards, "  holding  the  head,  from  which  all  the  body  by 
joints  and  bands  having  nourishment  ministered,  and  knit 
together,  increaseth  with  the  increase  of  God."^  "We 
being  many  are  one  body  in  Christ."*     "  As  the  body  is 

1)   Ephes.  i.  22,  23.  2)   Coloss.  i.  18  and  20  3  and  iii.  15. 

3)  Coloss.  ii.  19.  4)  Rom.  xii.  4. 


72  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

one,  and  hath  many  members,  and  all  the  members  of 
that  one  body,  being  many,  are  one  body,  so  also  is  Christ. 
For  by  one  Spirit  we  are  all  baptized  into  one  body,  whe- 
ther Ave  be  Jews  or  Gentiles,  whether  we  be  bond  or  free, 
and  have  been  all  made  to  drink  into  one  Spirit."^  "  Ye 
are  the  body  of  Christ  and  members  in  particular."^  To 
the  Ephesians,  he  says,  "  I  therefore,  the  prisoner  of  the 
Lord,  beseech  you  that  ye  walk  worthy  of  the  vocation 
wherewith  ye  are  called,  with  all  lowliness  and  meekness, 
with  lono:-sufferinor  forbearingr  one  another  in  love,  en- 
deavouring  to  keep  the  Unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of 
peace.  There  is  one  body  and  one  Spirit,  even  as  ye  are 
i  called  in  one  hope  of  your  calling,  one  Lord,  one  faith, 
one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above 
all,  and  through  all,  and  in  you  all.  But  unto  every  one 
of  us  is  given  grace  according  to  the  measure  of  the  gift 
of  Christ.  Wherefore  he  saith.  When  he  ascended  up 
on  high,  he  led  captivity  captive,  and  gave  gifts  unto 
men And  he  gave  some  apostles  and  some  pro- 
phets, and  some  evangelists,  and  some  pastors  and  teach- 
ers, for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints,  for  the  work  of  the 
ministry,  for  the  edifying  of  the  body  of  Christ,  till  we  all 
come  in  the  unity  of  the  faith  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  Go  1  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ ;  that  we  henceforth  be  no 
more  children  tossed  to  and  fro,  and  carried  about  with 
every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  sleight  of  men,  and  cun- 
ning craftiness,  whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  deceive ;  but 
speaking  the  truth  in  love,  may  grow  up  into  Him  in  all 
things,  which  is  the  Head,  even  Christ ;  from  whom  the 
whole  body  fitly  joined  together  and  compacted  by  that 
which  every  joint  suppheth,  according  to  the  effectual 
working  in  the  measure  oi'  every  part,  maketh  increase  of 
the  body  unto  the  editying  of  itself  in  love."^     So  to  the 

1)   1  Cor.  xii.  12,  13.        2)   1  Cor.  xii.  27.        3)   Ephes.  iv.  1—16. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH,  73 

Romans  he  says,  "As  we  have  many  members  in  one 
body,  and  all  members  have  not  the  same  office,  so  we 
being  many  are  one  body  in  Christ;  and  every  one  mem- 
bers one  of  another."^  And  carrying  out  the  same  idea, 
he  says  to  the  Corinthians,  that  there  are  diversities  of 
gifts,  administrations,  and  operations ;  the  manifestation 
of  the  Spirit  being  given  to  each  man  severally  for  his 
respective  ministry  in  the  edifying  of  the  one  body. 
"  God  hath  set  some  in  the  Church,  first  apostles,  second- 
arily prophets,  thirdly  teachers,  after  that  miracles,  then 
gifts  of  healing,  helps,  governments,  diversities  of  tongues. 
Are  all  apostles  1  Are  all  prophets  V'^ — all  parts  of  the 
body  being  thus  tempered  together  with  a  manifold  and 
various  endowment  of  powers  and  functions,  distributed 
to  each  several  member  for  the  interchange  of  service 
and  reciprocal  ministry,  and  for  the  ultimate  well-being 
of  the  whole. 

In  these  passages,  and  in  many  more,  St.  Paul  shad- 
ows forth  the  Church  under  the  figure  of  a  body,  and 
then  raises  the  figure  into  a  reality,  so  that  the  example  or 
argument  passes  by  a  sort  of  transfiguration  into  the 
mystery  of  Christ's  mystical  body,  as  when  he  says,  'We 
are  members  of  His  body,  of  His  flesh,  and  of  His  bones."^ 
And  to  this  transcendent  communion  he  likens  the  unity 
of  holy  wedlock.  '•  For  this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  his 
father  and  mother,  and  shall  be  joined  unto  his  wife,  and 
they  two  shall  be  one  flesh.  This  is  a  great  mystery,  but 
I  speak  concerning  Christ  and  his  Church."'^  From  all 
this,  I  say,  it  is  most  evident  that  St.  Paul  intends  to  ex- 
press not  more  the  Unity  of  Christ's  body  than  the  organic 
structure  of  the  Church. 

But  in  these  last  passages  we  have  arrived  at  a  further 
truth,  namely,  that  tlie  ministry  is  of  Divine  origin  and 

1)  Rom.  xii.  4,  5.  2)   1  Cor.  xu.  28,  29. 

3)  Ephes.  V.30.  4)  Ephes.  v.  31,  S. 


74  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

authority.  St.  Paul  ascribes  the  office  of  apostle,  pro- 
phet, evangelist,  pastor,  teacher.  &c.,  to  direct  institution 
of  tlie  Holy  Spirit.  This  great  fact  runs  through  the 
whole  inspired  document.  First,  we  read  that  Christ 
Himself  constituted  twelve  to  be  his  apostles  ;  next,  that 
they  by  a  dehberate  action  and  purpose  filled  in  the  place 
of  Judas  with  a  successor  to  his  apostolic  powers  ;  then 
that  they  ordained  elders  in  every  Church.  We  find  St. 
Paul  giving  charge  to  the  elders  of  the  Asiatic  Churches 
to  teed  the  flock  of  God,  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost  had 
made  them  overseers:  we  find  him  laying  hands  on 
Timothy,  and  constituting  Titus  to  the  oversight  of  Crete, 
and  instructing  them  in  their  spiritual  government  of  the 
Church,  and  providing  for  the  multiplication  and  suc- 
cession of  pastors.  If  the  ministry  be  not  of  Divine  origin, 
then  surely  nothing  can  be.  Neither  Baptism  nor  the 
Eucharist  has  more,  and  more  self-evident  proofs  of  be- 
ing instituted  by  the  act  and  continued  by  the  will  of  Christ 
and  of  God. 

But  besides  this  we  learn  from  the  passages  above 
cited,  that  the  ministry  of  the  Church  was  divinely  ap- 
pointed to  be  as  it  were  the  spinal  chord  of  the  whole 
body.  It  is  the  very  condition  of  structure  and  organiza- 
tion, and  the  divinely  ordained  means  of  growth  and  unity 
of  life.  I  raise  no  question  here  as  to  the  form  and  as- 
pect of  the  pohiy  of  the  Church,  and  speak  only  of  the 
Succession  of  pastors  deriving  power  from  the  Apostles 
of  Christ.  That  this  is  the  differentia  of  the  one  Church 
as  compared  with  other  congregations  of  men  is  evident, 
as  we  may  read  in  Holy  Scripture.  We  have  seen  that 
the  Church  "  continued  steadfastly  in  the  Apostles'  fel- 
lowship." We  read  of  nascent  schisms  in  the  Churches 
of  Galatia  and  Corinth,  which  were  formed  by  the  congre- 
gating of  unstablemen  round  teachers  who  professed  to  be 
Apostles  of  Christ.     The  Church  of  Ephesus  was  com- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  75 

mended  for  trying  them  which  said  they  were  Apostles, 
and  were  not,  and  finding  them  to  be  Hars.'  St.  Peter 
also  writes,  "  TJiere  were  false  prophets  also  among  the 
people,  even  as  there  shall  be  false  teachers  among  you, 
who  privily  shall  bring  in  damnable  heresies,  even  deny- 
ing the  Lord  that  bought  them,  and  bring  upon  them- 
selves swift  destruction.  And  many  shall  follow  their 
pernicious  ways,"  &c.^  St.  John,  speaking  of  the  fore- 
runners of  Anti-Christ  in  his  day,  says,  "  They  went  out 
from  us,  but  they  were  not  of  us ;  for  if  they  had  been  of 
us,  they  would  no  doubt  have  continued  with  us."^ 
"  These  be  they,"  says  St.  Jude,  "  which  separate  them- 
selves, sensual,  having  not  the  Spirit."*  And  St.  Paul, 
"For  first  of  ail,  when  ye  come  together  in  the  Church,  I 
hear  that  there  be  divisions  among  you,  and  I  partly  be- 
lieve it ;  for  there  must  needs  be  also  heresies  among 
you,  that  they  which  are  approved  may  be  made  manifest 
among  you."^  "  Obey  them  that  have  the  rule  over  you, 
and  submit  yourselves,  for  they  watch  for  your  souls  as 
they  that  must  give  account."^  "  And  we  beseech  you, 
brethren,  to  know  them  which  labour  among  you,  and 
are  over  you  in  the  Lord,  and  admonish  you.  And  to 
esteem  them  very  highly  in  love  for  their  work's  sake, 
and  to  be  at  peace  among  yourselves."'' 

From  these  passages  it  is  plain  that  the  divinely  ap- 
pointed ministry  of  the  Church  was  the  bond  which  knit 
together  the  members  of  Christ  in  one  visible  com- 
munion: that  it  was  in  fact  the  test  and  seal,  or,  so  to 
speak,  the  Sacrament  of  order  in  the  Church,  being  the 
idea  correlative  with  subordination.  From  this  also  we 
see  that  they  w4io,  by  false  teaching  or  insubordinate 
temper,  violated  the  Unity  of  the  faith,  or  of  the  Christian 

1)  Eev.  ii.  9.  2)  2  St,  Pet.  ii.  12.  3)   St.  John  ii.  19. 

4)  St.  Jude  19.  5)   1  Cor.  xi.  18,  19.  6)   Heb.  xiii.  17. 

7)   1  Thess.  V.  12,  13. 


76         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

family,  ceased  by  that  act  to  be  any  longer  members  of  the 
body.  This  severing  from  the  body  of  Christ  was  twofold : 
either  wilful,  as  in  the  case  of  heretics  and  schismatics, 
who  separated  themselves  from  the  Church,  for  instance 
the  Nicolaitans^  and  the  Gnostic  teachers;  or  penal,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  excommunicated  Corinthian,  who  was 
"  put  away"  from  the  body  of  the  Church  and  delivered 
by  them  "  unto  Satan  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh,  that 
the  spirit  might  be  saved  in  the  day  of  the  Lord  Jesus.'"^ 
And  again  of  Hymenseus  and  Alexander,  whom  St.  Paul 
delivered  unto  Satan,  "  that  they  might  learn  not  to  blas- 
pheme."^ To  any  one  who  will  consider  the  nature  of 
excommunication,  and  the  authority  by  which  it  was  in- 
flicted, it  will  be  abundantly  plain  that  it  signifies  a  judi- 
cial separation,  by  authoritative  sentence  of  the  spiritual 
rulers,  from  the  body  of  Christ's  Church.  And  this  will 
be  sufficient  proof  of  the  nature  of  the  Church  as  re- 
corded in  Scripture,  that  it  was  a  visible  body,  having  an 
exact  internal  organization,  and  subjected  to  constituted 
rulers.  We  learn  also  that  the  Unity  of  that  body  is 
twofold  :  one  kind  of  Unity  being  objective,  consisting  in 
its  faith,  sacraments,  and  organized  polity;  the  other 
subjective,  in  the  peace  and  brotherly  love  of  the  several 
members. 

In  the  foregoing  pages  1  have  gathered  together  such 
passages  of  Holy  Writ  as  declare  to  us  the  nature  of  the 
one  visible  Church  ;  but  there  are  still  other  declarations 
of  the  inspired  writers  which  must  be  taken  into  view  to 
complete  the  full  meaning  of  •'  the  Holy  Church." 

In  writing  to  the  Ephesians,  St.  Paul  says  that  God 
having  raised  Christ  from  the  dead,  '•  set  him  at  his  own 
right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places,  far  above  all  princi- 
pality, and  power,  and  might,  and  dominion,  and  every 
name  that  is  named  not  only  in  this  world,  but  also  in 

1)  Rev.  ii.  6.  2)   1  Cor.  v.  13.  3)  1  Tim.  i.  20. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  77 

that  which  is  to  come  ;"'  and  also  to  the  Philippians,  that 
God  had  •'  exalted  Him,  and  given  Him  a  name  which  is 
above  every  name,  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus  every  knee 
should  bow,  of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and 
things  under  the  earth,  and  that  every  tongue  should  con- 
fess that  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord."^ 

To  the  Colossians  he  writes,  "  Who  is  the  image  of 
the  invisible  God,  the  first-born  of  every  creature  :  for  by 
Him  were  all  things  created,  that  are  in  heaven  and  that 
are  in  earth,  visible  and  invisible,  whether  they  be 
thrones,  or  dominions,  or  principalities,  or  powers :  all 
things  were  created  by  Him  and  for  Him ;  and  He  is  be- 
fore all  things,  and  by  Him  all  things  consist,  and  He  is 
the  Head  of  the  body  which  is  the  Church  :  who  is  the  be- 
ginning, the  first-born  from  the  dead  ;  that  in  all  things 
He  might  have  the  pre-eminence.  For  it  pleased  the 
Father  that  in  Him  should  all  fulness  dwell.  And,  hav- 
ing made  peace  through  the  blood  of  His  cross,  by  Him 
to  reconcile  all  things  unto  Himself;  by  Him,  I  say, 
whether  they  be  things  in  earth,  or  things  in  heaven."^ 

And  in  like  manner,  teaching  the  Hebrew  Christians 
how  high  was  their  calling  in  Christ,  he  says,  "  Ye  are 
come  unto  Mount  Sion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God, 
the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  an  innumerable  company 
of  angels,  to  the  general  assembly  and  Church  of  the 
first-born,  which  are  written  in  heaven,  and  to  God  the 
Judge  of  all,  and  to  the  spirits  of  jusfmen  made  perfect, 
and  to  Jesus  the  Mediator  of  ihe  New  Covenant,  and  to 
the  blood  of  sprinkling,  which  speaketh  better  things  than 
that  of  Abel."* 

From  these  places  it  is  evident  that  the  incarnation 
and  passion  of  the  Son  of  God  is  the  mysterious  cause  of 
a  new  order,  in  which  even  unseen  and  heavenly  beings 

1)   Ephes.  i.  20,  21.         2)  Phil.  ii.  9,  10,  11.        3)   Coloss.  i.  15—20. 
4)  Heb.  xii.  22,  23,  24. 


78         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

are  partakers.  The  Father  sent  him  into  the  world  to 
redeem  and  to  regenerate  the  creation  of  God,  "that  in 
the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might  gather 
together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in 
heaven  and  which  are  in  earth." ^  How  or  in  what  man- 
ner the  heavenly  orders  are  reconstituted  in  a  new  order ; 
whether  the  original  sin  of  angels  was  a  refusal  of  hom- 
age to  the  anticipated  mystery  of  the  Incarnate  Son ; 
whether  the  elect  angels,  as  they  yielded  adoration  to 
the  Word  made  flesh,  so  are  now  partakers  of  a  new 
summing  up  of  God's  creatures  under  a  new  Head*^  in 
Christ  Jesus,  we  know  not.  Most  evident  it  is  that  they, 
together  Avith  the  spirits  of  just  men  made  perfect,  are 
members  of  Christ's  mediatorial  kingdom,  and  gathered 
together  with  the  visible  Church  of  Christ  under  one 
Head  in  a  wonderful  order. ^  They  are  members  with 
us  of  the  one  mystical  body,  of  which  part  is  seen  and 
part  unseen. 

We  have  now  gone  through  the  writings  of  the  inspir- 
ed teachers  of  the  Church,  so  as  to  leave  few  passages, 
that  I  am  aware  of,  bearing  explicitly  on  the  subject,  un- 
touched. And  the  result  to  which  we  have  come  is  this — 
that  the  Church  of  Christ  is  a  body  of  which  one  part  is 
visible,  the  other  invisible  ;  that  it  is  constituted  of  angels 
and  men  ;  and  that  of  these  some  are  already  perfect, 
and  some  in  their  imperfect  state  ;  that  the  visible  part  of 
the  one  body,  here  on  earth,  is  the  congregation  of  Chris- 
tian men  w^ho  are  under  the  rule  of  pastors  deriving  their 
succession  from  the  Apostles  of  Christ. 

I  am  not  aware  that  I  have  strained  the  proof  of  any 
one  point  in  this  argument.  I  might  have  made  it  even 
more  definite  in  some  of  its  features,  but  I  had  rather  draw 
a  conclusion  which  should  fall  far  within  the  circumfer- 

1)   Ephes.  i.  10.  2)   di'aicerpa'Xai'oanaOai. 

3)  Colleci  for  the  Feast  of  St.  Michael  and  All  Angels. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


r9 


ence  of  the  premises  than  exceed  their  limits  by  never  so 
small  an  excess. 

On  a  principle  which  must  be  obvious,  I  forbear  at- 
tempting to  deduce  from  Scripture  any  thing  more  than 
the  outUne  of  this  doctrine.  It  is  plainly  not  less  unrea- 
sonable to  look  to  Holy  Scripture  for  an  anticipated  reso- 
lution of  modern  controversies  than  to  search  in  it  for  a 
proof  of  its  own  inspiration.  How,  for  instance,  should 
we  expect  to  find  the  Apostles  in  their  own  lifetim  3  ad- 
justing questions  about  the  validity  or  invalidity  of  the 
succession?  It  is  plain  that  they  ordained  a  system  in 
the  world,  which  contained  in  it  the  germ  of  a  mysteri- 
ous development.  The  fact  is  sufficient  proof  of  their 
intention.  The  founding  of  the  Church  contains  in  it 
the  principle  of  succession,  as  the  birth  of  a  living  soul 
contains  a  continuous  personal  identity. 

Sufficient  has,  I  trust,  been  adduced  to  prove  that  the 
teaching  of  the  inspired  and  uninspired  writers  is  in  exact 
agreement. 

Unless  it  can  be  shown  that  I  have  misrepresented 
the  meaning  of  the  Fathers  or  of  the  Apostles,  I  may 
now  assume  that  the  article  in  the  Creed  is  the  enuncia- 
tion, the  teaching  of  the  Fathers  the  exposition,  and  the 
witness  of  Holy  Scripture  the  proof  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Unity  of  the  Church  as  here  expressed. 


THE    FORM    AND    MATTER    OF   UNITY. 

We  have  now  ascertained,  at  least  in  outline,  the  na- 
ture of  the  Unit}^  of  the  Church.  If  I  may  be  allowed  to 
use  a  word  already  forced  by  the  poverty  of  our  abstract 
language  upon  a  well-known  writer,^  I  would  say  that 
the  doctrine  of  unity  contains  the  ideas  both  of  oweZmess, 
and  of  oneness. 

The  oneZmes-?  of  the  Church  is  that  which  is  expressed 
in  the  Creed  preserved  in  the  works  of  Alexander  by  the 
{.dav  y.al  fiorrjj'  ^xyJ.rjniav,  the  one,  and  one  only  Church. 
The  oneness  relates  to  its  essential  nature,  and  to  the 
mode  in  which  it  is  one. 

Of  unity,  in  the  sense  that  there  is  one  and  one  only 
Church,  enough  has  been  already  said:  but  of  unity 
which  is  the  cause  and  reason  of  tlie  oneliness  of  the 
Church,  we  have  as  yet  spoken  only  in  a  broad  and  gen- 
eral way.  In  the  present  chapter,  therefore,  we  will  take 
up  this  part  of  the  subject. 

I  have  already  said  that  the  unity  of  the  visible  part 
of  the  Church  may  be  divided  into  a  twofold  kind,  name- 
ly, organic  or  objective,  and  moral  or  subjective;  and  I 
will  endeavour  to  show  the  nature  of  these  two  several 

1)  Cudworlh,  Intell.  System,  p.  633,  fol.  1G78. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  81 

aspects  of  unity,  and  the  reason  for  so  distinguishing 
them. 

By  the  organic  unity  of  the  Church  may  be  understood 
the  oneness  of  the  form  and  constitution  which  God  by 
direct  act  and  inspiration  has  ordained ;  as  we  speak  of 
the  organic  nature  of  the  world  or  of  man,  distinct  from 
the  powers  of  hfe  and  moral  action.  1  would  therefore 
use  the  term  as  coextensive  with  the  whole  objective 
economy  of  God;  including  all  that  He  has  taught  and 
ordained,  or,  as  we  are  wont  commonly  to  say,  both  the 
doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church ;  and  excluding  all 
that  relates  to  the  subjective  nature,  condition,  and  pro- 
bation of  man. 

By  the  moral  unity  of  the  Church  may  be  understood 
the  oneness  of  the  subjective  nature,  condition,  and  cha- 
racter of  mankind,  wrought  out  and  maintained  through 
the  organic  unity  of  the  whole  dispensation ;  as  we  dis- 
tinguish between  the  moral  character  and  habits  of  a 
family,  and  the  lineal  descent  and  collateral  relations 
which  determine  the  unity  and  identity  of  the  race. 

We  will  now  take  these  two  points  in  order. 

And  first,  under  the  idea  of  organic  unity,  we  will 
comprehend  both  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the 
Church.  In  exact  truth,  this  common  division  is  illogi- 
cal, inasmuch  as  the  several  members  will  be  found  recip- 
rocally to  include  a  portion  of  the  same  idea.  As,  for 
instance,  it  does  not  readily  appear  whether  we  ought  to 
refer  the  Holy  Sacraments  to  the  head  of  doctrine  or  of 
discipline.  They  are  doctrinal  so  far  as  they  are  matters 
of  doctrine,  and  have  a  symbolical  aspect  to  adumbrate 
the  mystery  of  redemption;  they  are  disciplinary  so  far 
as  they  consist  of  visible  signs  which  form  the  central 
points  of  the  Liturgy,  and  order  of  the  Church.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  Sacramental  Rites,  such  as  Or- 
ders, Confirmation,  and  the  like.     If  they  are  disciplinary 

5 


82  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

in  so  far  as  they  constitute  the  outward  grades  and  sys- 
tem of  the  Church,  they  are  no  less  doctrinal  in  their 
symbolical  aspect,  which  expresses  the  derived  authority 
of  Christ,  and  the  presence  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

It  would  be  more  strictly  true,  and  philosophical,  if  we 
were  to  say  that  God  has  revealed  His  saving  truth  to 
mankind  partly  by  word,  and  partly  by  figure ;  that  He 
has  partly  spoken  and  partly  shadowed  forth  the  mystery 
of  salvation :  for  if  the  words  of  the  Gospel  are  the  words 
of  eternal  life  through  the  blood-shedding  of  Christ,  cer- 
tainly Holy  Baptism,  and  the  Holy  Eucharist,  and  Holy 
Orders,  and  Confirmation,  and  the  succession  of  the  Apos- 
tles, and  the  polity  of  the  Church,  are  adumbrations  as 
well  as  effectual  means  of  spiritual  birth,  and  food,  and 
strength,  and  authority,  and  of  the  presence  of  Christ, 
and  of  the  fatherhood  of  God.  It  is  the  one  truth  indivi- 
sible, now  spoken,  now  shadowed  forth,  now  traced  invi- 
sibly in  the  reason,  now  shown  visibly  to  the  eye :  doc- 
trine and  discipline,  faith  and  sacraments,  the  Gospel 
and  the  Church  are,  as  it  were,  one  Christ,  now  mani- 
festing Himself,  now  conveying  Himself  away  from 
sense. 

But  with  this  understanding  of  the  terms  the  popular 
division  is  sufficiently  exact  for  our  present  purpose.  We 
will  therefore  proceed  to  speak  of  the  unity  of  doctrine 
and  discipline,  including  under  the  former  the  Faith  and 
Sacraments,  and  under  the  latter  the  succession  and  pol- 
ity of  the  Church,  of  which  the  sacramental  rites  are  the 
bands  and  junctures. 

We  say,  then,  that  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the 
whole  Church  is  one. 

Of  the  unity  of  doctrine,  except  so  far  as  it  is  a  divine 
condition  to  the  unity  of  disciphne,  I  have  no  intention  or 
need  to  speak.  All  Christians  agree  in  holding,  both 
that  a  right  Faith  is  a  necessary  condition  for  Baptism, 


^       THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  83 

and  for  continuance  in  the  communion  of  the  Church ; 
and  also  that  by  departing  from  the  unity  of  the  Faith  a 
man  departs  from  the  unity  of  the  body  of  Christ. 

That  the  Apostles  in  all  places  taught  one  and  the 
same  doctrine,  that  the  deposit  of  the  Faith  has  been 
handed  down  by  Catholic  tradition  whole  and  undimin- 
ished unto  this  day,  that  an  inward  submission  of  mind 
to  this  one  trae  objective  mystery  is  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, we  all  believe.  We  hold  also  that  churches,  as 
men.  may  fall  from  the  unity  of  the  body  by  falling  from 
the  unity  of  the  Faith :  or,  in  other  words,  that  heresy 
severs  a  member,  whether  it  be  a  church  or  a  man,  from 
the  one  visible  body.  The  objective  forms,  then,  in  which 
this  unity  consists,  are  the  doctrine  of  Faith  as  revealed 
by  Christ  through  His  Aposdes,  the  Holy  Sacraments 
and  Sacramental  Rites,  namely.  Holy  Baptism,  by  which 
men  are  first  knit  into  one  body,  and  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
by  which  men  are  nurtured  and  kept  in  the  same :  the 
imposition  of  hands  with  prayer,  which  are  the  essen- 
tial form  and  matter  in  Holy  Orders,  and  in  Confirma- 
tion :  the  authoritative  benediction  of  the  Church  at  Holy 
Matrimony,  and  all  things  which  the  Apostles  taught  or 
ordained  as  matters  of  immutable  obligation. 

We  are  now  chiefly  concerned  with  that  part  of 
organic  unity  which  consists  of  discipline. 

In  the  second  chapter  we  saw  that  the  limits  of  the 
visible  Church  are  determined  by  an  organized  polity — 
in  the  last  that  this  polity  consists  in  the  authoritative 
oversight  of  a  divinely  appointed  ministry,  deriving  its 
succession  from  the  Apostles.  But  hitherto  I  have  ab- 
stained from  defining  its  exact  form ;  the  real  and  only 
important  principle  lying  in  the  fact  that  the  visible  Church 
in  all  ages  is  the  same  with  that  which  the  Apostles 
founded. 


84  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

It  is  evident  that  mere  likeness  or  correspondence  in 
form  cannot  constitute  this  identity.  There  must  be  some 
essential  condition  which  shall  make  it  to  be  the  true 
lineal  descendant  and  lawful  representative  of  the  origi- 
nal body.  It  is  with  the  Church  as  with  a  family  or  a 
kingdom.  Their  identity  depends  on  the  direct  and  law- 
ful devolution  of  the  rights  of  primogeniture  and  of  pre- 
rogative. No  assumption  by  any  other  body  of  name, 
title,  and  customs,  without  ihis  continuity,  would  make  it 
one  with  them.  A  kingdom  may  undergo  many  political 
mutations.  It  may  lapse  from  a  despotism  to  a  demo- 
cracy, and  yet  retain  its  personality.  Athens  under  the 
kings,  decennial  and  annual  archons,  was  yet  one  and 
the  same  people.  It  is  conceivable  that  the  Church  also 
might  retain  its  identity,  even  though  its  polity  were  in- 
definitely changed ;  I  say  it  is  conceivable,  in  so  far  as 
the  intrinsic  nature  of  any  form  of  polity  is  concerned, 
for  its  polity  is  to  its  true  identity  what  the  countenance 
or  the  figure  of  a  man  is  to  his  complex  and  true  identity 
of  person.  And  therefore  they  do  but  miss  the  point, 
and  perplex  the  subject,  who  contend  for  or  against  Epis- 
copacy or  Presbytery  as  such.  Saving  always  the  basis 
of  identity,  God  might  have  been  pleased  to  leave  the 
polity  of  the  Church  without  express  form,  to  find  its  own 
level,  and  take  its  own  shape,  moulding  it  here  and  there, 
from  time  to  time,  by  the  unseen  pressure  of  His  over- 
ruling hand,  as  He  is  wont  to  do  in  the  kingdoms  of  the 
earth.  The  Church  retaining  its  transmitted  authority 
might,  had  He  so  willed,  have  put  on  a  succession  of  new 
aspects,  and  conformed  itself  to  the  changeable  pohties 
of  the  world.  It  might  have  been  the  ductile  element, 
instead  of  ihe  fixed  mould  of  human  society.  But  it  is  a 
fact  in  God's  work  of  regenerating  the  world  that  He 
has  cast  His  Church  into  one  definite  shape.    Like  the 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  85 

bodily  structure  of  man,  it  might  have  been  otherwise 
arranged,  but,  without  a  divine  interposition,  it  now  can- 
not be.     There  is  only  one,  universal,  necessary  type. 

We  will  therefore  go  on  to  investigate  the  exact  nature 
of  this  pohty  or  organization.  And  as  in  the  last  chapter 
we  assumed  for  the  enunciation  of  ouj'  subject  the  article 
of  the  Catholic  creed,  so  in  this  we  will  assume  as  a  fact 
the  polity  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  from  the  existing 
phenomena  trace  upwards  to  the  origin  of  the  Church, 
and  thereby  ascertain  in  what  the  essence  of  this  organic 
polity  consists. 

The  first  fact,  then,  which  strikes  the  eye  at  this  time 
in  the  world,  is  a  visible  body  of  many  members  profess- 
ing lineal  descent  and  succession  from  the  Apostles  of 
Christ.  We  find  this  body  in  the  extreme  East  and  West, 
of  a  self-evident  and  immemorial  antiquity;  bearing  the 
stamp  and  character  of  ages  long  gone  by  ;  and  agreeing 
universally  in  the  chief  and  primary  elements  of  its  or- 
ganized system.  The  Catholic  Church  of  this  day  is  self- 
evidently  one.  It  has  a  correlation  of  parts  and  a  central 
unity  which  are  the  properties  of  an  individual  being. 
Throughout  its  first  great  subdivision  into  Patriarchates, 
and  its  secondary  into  Primacies,  subject  or  independent, 
Metropolitical  or  Archiepiscopal,  and  into  its  several 
Episcopal  jurisdictions — throughout  the  offices  of  the 
Priesthood,  and  the  functions  of  the  Diaconate,  there  is 
a  series,  and  order  of  place  and  power.  From  the  Patri- 
arch of  Rome^  to  the  acolyte  there  is  a  subordination  of 

1)  The  precedence  granted  to  the  Church  of  Rome  was  given  according 
to  the  rule  observed  throughout  the  whole  empire.  The  seats  of  the  chief 
civil  power  were  also  the  sees  of  the  chief  spiritual  authorities,  (see  Bingham, 
B.  ix.  i.  iv.)  The  first  city  of  the  empire  conferred  on  the  Church  of  that 
city  its  own  precedence  The  basis  of  the  greatness  of  the  Roman  Church 
was  therefore  partly  civil  and  partly  ecclesiastical,  using  that  word  as  defined 
in  the  text,  and  not  to  expiess  a  directly  divine  or  apostolical  appointment. 
Rome  was  the  culminating  point  of  civilization  and  empire,  the  political 


86  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

degrees ;  and  in  all  the  parts  of  the  whole  body  there  is  an 
organic  unity.  And  here  a  distinction  must  be  drawn  be- 
tween what  is  of  ecclesiastical  and  what  is  of  apostolical 

centre,  and  the  focus  of  all  lines  of  communication  and  authority.  It  was 
the  richest  and  the  most  numerous  Church,  and  therefore  readily  became 
the  first  in  rank.  This  is  what  St.  Iienoeus  intends  by  "proptei  potiorem 
principalitatera."  Adv.  Haer.  lib.  iii.  3.  For  this  reason  also,  it  would  seem, 
the  two  great  apostles  of  the  circumcision  and  the  uncircumcision  bestowed 
on  it  so  much  labour.  All  these  things  gave  it  a  natural  precedence,  and  yet 
we  find  TertuUian  speaking  of  it  only  as  one  of  the  chief  apostolic  sees.  De 
Prsescr.  xxxvi.  The  attempt  to  found  its  precedence  on  a  divine  appoint- 
ment through  St.  Peter  is  not  a  primitive  tradition.  St.  Cyprian,  in  the  third 
century,  is  the  first  that  calls  it  the  "  Chair  of  Peter,"  (Ep.  Iv.,)  and  yet  in 
his  mouth  it  was  only  a  title,  not  a  prerogative.  It  was  in  the  Novatian  and 
Donatist  schisms  that  the  succession  and  origin  of  the  Roman  Church,  being 
often  forced  into  argument,  began  to  assume  a  peculiar  aspect.  The  nature 
of  the  controversy  drew  from  St.  Cyprian,  Optatus,  and  St.  Augustin,  the 
kind  of  appeal  and  statement  on  which  so  much  has  been,  in  after  ages,  built. 
The  whole  class  of  passages  have  one  plain  interpretation.  They  assert  the 
genuineness  of  the  succession  derived  from  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  not 
against  other  genuine  successions  in  the  Catholic  Church,  but  against  the 
schismatical  rivals.  Thence  the  chair  of  Peter  and  the  succession  of  Peter 
passed  into  a  common  title  for  the  Roman  succession,  and  by  degrees  began 
to  be  assigned  as  the  ground  of  precedence  in  the  Western  Church. 

When  the  seat  of  empire  was  transferred  to  Constantinople  the  fathers  in 
the  Council  of  Constantinople  assigned  to  that  Church  as  the  Church  of  the 
new  Rome  a  precedence  next  after  the  old,  proving  thereby  on  what  it  was 
originally  grounded.  The  decree  is  as  follows :  "  Let  the  Bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople have  the  place  of  chief  honour  after  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  because 
Constantinople  is  New  Rome."  Canon.  3.  Bevereg.  Pandectae,  vol.  i.  89. 
And  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  confirmed  and  extended  these  privileges,  add- 
ing the  reason  more  at  large.  *'  The  fathers  reasonably  assigned  the  chief 
privileges  to  the  throne  (see)  of  old  Rome,  because  that  city  had  the  imperial 
power :  and,  moved  by  the  same  regard,  the  hundred  and  fifty  holy  Bishops 
assigned  equal  privileges  to  the  most  holy  throne  of  new  Rome,  rightly  de- 
ciding that  the  city  which  is  honoured  with  the  empire  and  senate  ought  to 
enjoy  the  same  privileges  as  the  elder  Rome  which  had  the  imperial  govern- 
ment," &;c.  Can.  xxviii.  Bev.  Pand,  vol.  i.  145.  So  Concil.  in  Trullo,  Can. 
36.  The  ninth  canon  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  extends  the  privileges  of 
Constantinople  beyond  any  that  Rome  had  enjoyed.  The  Roman  jurisdiction 
has  no  divine,  i.  e.,  direct  or  apostolical  foundation.  This  may  be  seen  in 
Mr.  Palmer's  masterly  chapter  on  the  Roman  PontiflT,  Treatise  on  the  Church, 
vol.  ii.  p.  501 ;  in  Barrow  on  the  Supremacy  ;  and  in  Nectarius  adversus, 
Imp.  Papae  J  or  in  the  work  of  Nilus,  archbishop  of  Thessalonica,de  Primatu 
Papa)  Rom. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  87 

origin.  Tiie  precedence  of  patriarchal  and  archiepisco- 
pal  sees  rests  on  the  canons  of  the  Church,  and  arose  by 
the  force  of  accidents,  separable,  before  the  event,  from 
all  sees  alike.  Patriarchs  and  Metropolitans  were  the 
bishops  either  of  the  greatest  or  of  the  oldest  sees.  Civil 
precedence  is  the  basis  of  the  Patriarchal,  and  spiritual 
maternity  of  the  Metropolitical,  authority.  But  the  basis 
of  all  apostolical  power,  whether  in  Patriarchs,  Metro- 
politans, or  archbishops,  is  the  one  episcopate,  of  which 
indivisible  authority  all  bishops  are  each  one  severally 
and  in  full  partakers.  Howsoever  complex,  therefore,  the 
aspect  of  the  Church  Catholic  may  have  become  by  the 
lapse  and  pressure  of  ages,  its  complexity  may  be  re- 
solved into  the  simple  form  of  polity  ordained  by  the 
Apostles.  The  threefold  orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and 
deacons,  which  are  at  this  day  found  in  all  churches,  are 
the  groundwork  and  essential  element  of  the  whole  or- 
ganized system.  It  is  therefore  unnecessary  for  our 
present  purpose  to  trace  the  ecclesiastical  development 
of  the  Church,  and  to  ascertain  at  what  time  the  several 
patriarchal  and  metropolitical  privileges  were  confer- 
red. It  is  enough  to  take  ihe  apostolical  element  of  the 
ecclesiastical  system,  and  to  trace  it  upward  to  its  be- 
ginning. 

Every  one,  how  slightly  soever  read  in  the  history  of 
the  Church,  is  aware  tliat  from  the  present  day  upward 
to  the  time  of  Constantino,  there  has  existed  a  successive 
ministry  in  the  three  orders  of  bishops,  priests,  and  dea- 
cons. At  the  time  of  the  Council  of  Nice  the  episcopate 
of  the  whole  Church  consisted  of  about  1800  bishops, 
i.  e.  1000  in  the  Eastern,  and  800  in  the  Western  Churches. 

Our  examination,  therefore,  may  be  confined  to  the 
three  centuries  between  Constantine  and  the  Apostles  of 
Christ. 

In  tracing  out  this  subject  I  shall  first  adduce  proofs 


88  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH." 

from  uninspired  writers,  and  reserve  the  proofs  of  Holy 
Scripture  to  the  last. 

To  begin,  then,  with  the  writers  of  the  second  centu- 
ry, we  may  adduce  a  letter  of  the  clergy  of  the  Roman 
Church  to  St.  Cyprian.  This  epistle  was  written  on  the 
death  of  Fabianus,  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  during  the 
vacancy  of  the  see.  It  is  inscribed  by  "  the  Presbyters 
and  Deacons  at  Rome  to  St.  Cyprian."  They  say,  con- 
cerning a  case  of  difficulty  then  before  them,  "  Although  a 
greater  necessity  to  defer  this  case  lies  upon  us,  seeing 
that,  since  the  death  of  Fabianus,  by  reason  of  the  diffi- 
cult condition  of  affairs  and  of  the  time,  we  have  as  yet 
no  bishop  appointed  to  administer  these  things,  and  by 
his  authority  and  counsel  to  take  cognizance  of  the  lapsed 
brethren.  Although  in  a  matter  of  this  great  moment 
•we  are  content  with  what  you  have  expressed,  that 
the  peace  of  the  Church  should  be  first  maintained,  and 
then  account  taken  of  the  lapsed  after  a  conference  of  the 
bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  together  with  the  confess- 
ors and  the  faithful  laity,  &c."^  We  find  St.  Cyprian 
giving  account  of  his  correspondence  with  the  clergy  of 
Rome  to  the  clergy  of  his  own  Church  at  Carthage,  and 
inscribing  his  letter  "to  his  brethren  the  Priests  and  Dea- 
cons.'"^ Throughout  all  his  works  this  threefold  order  is 
every v/here  recognised.  A  remarkable  incidental  proof 
of  this  is  to  be  found  in  his  letter  to  Rogatianus,  a  bishop, 
against  whom  one  of  his  own  deacons  had  behaved  con- 
tumaciously. He  commends  him  for  his  gentleness, 
"  seeing  that  by  virtue  of  the  episcopate  and  authority  of 
the  see  he  had  power  to  inflict  summary  punishment"^ 
upon  a  deacon.  Against  a  presbyter  the  apostle  forbids 
an  accusation  to  be  received  except  before  two  or  three 
witnesses.^ 

1)  Ep.  xxxi.  ed.  Ben.  2)  Ep.  xxxii.  ed.  Ben. 

.3)  AdRogat,  Ep.  Ixv.  ed.  Ben.        4)  )  Tim.  v.  19. 


THE     UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  89 

With  this  distinct  use  of  the  titles  St.  Cyprian  says: 
"Thence  (from  the  mission  of  the  Apostle  St.  Peter) 
through  the  changes  of  time  and  succession  the  ordina- 
tion of  bishops  and  rule  of  the  Church  runs  down  (to  us), 
that  the  Church  should  be  built  upon  the  bishops,  and 
every  act  of  the  Church  be  controlled  by  them  as  rulers  ;"^ 
whom  in  another  epistle  he  describes  as  "  a  sacerdotal 
college,"^  ''  a  single  episcopate  of  many  bishops  diffused 
abroad  in  a  numerous  and  accordant  multitude,"^  in  whose 
unity  the  Church  is  united,  wlio  have  of  God  an  absolute 
power,  but  may  neither  judge  nor  be  judged  by  a  col- 
league ;  forasmuch  as  "  all  alike  wait  for  the  judgment  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  alone  has  power  both  to  ad- 
vance them  to  the  government  of  His  Church  and  to  judge 
of  their  actions."'' 

So  also  Origen,  himself  a  Presbyter,  says,  "More  is 
required  of  me  than  of  a  deacon,  and  more  of  a  deacon 
than  of  a  layman.  But  from  him  to  whom  is  committed 
the  chief  power  in  the  Church  over  us  all,  still  more  is  re- 
quired."-' And  in  his  homilies  on  St.  Matthew,  "the 
bishop,  priest,  and  deacon  are  a  symbol  of  realities  corres- 
pondent with  their  names."®  So,  in  another  place,  he 
likens  the  deacons  who  mal-administered  the  Church 
goods  to  the  money-changers  in  the  temple,  and  bishops 
and  priests  who  committed  the  Church  of  Christ  to  un- 
worthy men,  to  the  sellers  of  doves  f  so,  in  many  places 
the  three  orders  are  recognized.  Also,  Tertullian,  whose 
witness  runs  into  the  second  century,  says  of  baptism,  that 
"the  power  of  giving  it  is  in  the  chief  priest,  which  is  the 
bishop:  thence  the  Presbyters  and  deacons  have  it;  and 

1)   Ep.  xxvii.  ed.    Ben.  2)  Ep.  lii.  3)   Ibid. 

4)  Coirciliura  Carthag  p.  330. 

5)  Orig.  Horn,  in  Jer.  2,  quoted  by  Beveridge,  Cod.  Can.  Eccl.  Prim. 
Vind.  &.C.  c.  X.  3. 

6)  Orig.  in  Matth.  torn.  xiv.  22. 

7)  Ibid.  toni.  xvi.  22.     See  also  Hom.  9,  in  Cantic.  Caniic. 


90  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

yet  they  may  not  give  it  without  the  authority  ofthe  bish- 
op, for  the  dignity  of  the  Church,  in  preserving  which, 
peace  also  is  preserved."^  And  speaking  of  the  confu- 
sion among  the  heretical  sects,  he  says,  "Advancement 
is  nowhere  so  easy  as  in  the  rebels'  camp,  where  to  be  is 
to  be  meritorious.  Therefore  to-day  one  man  is  bishop, 
to-morrow  another  ;  to-day  he  is  a  deacon  who  to-morrow 
is  a  reader ;  to-day  a  Presbyter  who  to-morrow  is  a  layman, 
for  even  to  laymen  they  commit  sacerdotal  functions. "^ 

We  now  come  into  the  second  century,  in  which  we 
may  first  cite  St.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  who,  in  a  re- 
markable passage,  sufficiently  shows  what  was  the  polity 
of  the  Church  in  his  times.  He  says,  "The  grades  of 
promotion  in  the  Church,  that  is,  of  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons,  are  imitations,  I  conceive,  of  the  angelic 
srlory."^  So  also  Hegesippus,  who  lived  in  the  early  part 
of  the  second  century,  the  first  writer  of  ecclesiastical 
history,  tells  us  that  "  the  Corinthian  Church  continued  in 
theright  faith  until  the  episcopate  of  Primus:"^  also,  speak- 
ing of  Jerusalem,  he  says,  "  After  the  martyrdom  of  James 
the  Just,  next  after  his  uncle  Symeon,  the  son  of  Cleopas 
was  made  bishop  ;"  and  immediately  after,  "  Thebuthis, 
because  he  was  not  made  bishop,  began  secretly  to  cor- 
rupt (the  Church)."^  In  this  way  he  always  distinguishes 
the  episcopate  from  the  other  orders.  As  Polycrates, 
Bishop  of  Ephesus,  also  says,  "  Polycarp,  who  w\^s  Bish- 
op of  Smyrna,  and  a  martyr,  and  Thraseas,  Bishop  of 
Eumenia,  and  a  martyr;  why  should  I  speak  of  Sagaris, 
who  was  also  bishop  and  martyr?"  He  calls  himself  also 
bishop,  as  Ignatius  does:  "Seven  of  my  kindred,"  he 
eays,  "  were  bishops,  and  I  the  eighth."^ 

1)  De  Baptismo,  c.  17.  2)  De  praescr.  Haeret.  c.  xli. 

3)  Strom,  vi.  c.  13.  p.  793.  Pottei. 

4)  Biblioth.  Vet.  Patiurn.  Gallandii,  torn.  ii.  64  :   also  Eiisob.  Ernl.  Hist. 
lilj.  iv.  r,  xxii.  5)   Ibid.  05.  G)   Ibid.  Ifil. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  91 

We  may  next  cite  St.  Irenseus,  who  was  of  the  same 
age  with  Polycarp,  and  his  disciple.  Speaking  of  St. 
Paul's  journey  through  Asia  Minor,'  he  says,  "The 
bishops  and  presbyters  who  came  from  Ephesus  and  the 
other  neighbouring  cities,  being  called  together  at  Mile- 
tus, because  he  was  hastening  to  keep  the  Pentecost  at 
Jerusalem,"^  he  charged  them  and  foretold  what  should 
befall  him.  In  another  place  he  writes,  "  Every  one  who 
desires  to  see  the  truth  may  readily  perceive  the  tradition 
of  the  Apostles,  which  is  manifested  in  all  the  Church; 
and  we  are  able  to  enumerate  those  who  were  ordained 
bishops  in  the  Churches  by  the  Apostles  and  their  suc- 
cessors even  to  our  day."^  "But  since  it  would  be  too 
long  a  work  in  sur.h  a  book  as  this  to  enumerate  the  suc- 
cessions of  all  the  Churches,  we  confound  all  (heretics) 

by  exhibiting  the  tradition  of  the  great,  and  most 

ancient,  and  well-known  Church,  which  by  the  two  glo- 
rious Apostles,  Peter  and  Paul,  was  founded  and  estab- 
lished at  Rome,  the  tradition  which  it  has  from  the  Apos- 
tles, and  the  faith  which  is  declared  to  all  men,  and  has 
come  down  by  the  succession  of  bishops  to  us,"*  &c. 
And  immediately  after,  '•  The  blessed  Apostles,  there- 
fore, having  founded  and  instructed  the  Church,  com- 
mitted the  office  of  the  episcopate  to  Linus.  Of  this 
Linus  St.  Paul  makes  mention  in  his  Epistle  to  Timothy. 
His  successor  was  Anacletus.  After  him,  in  the  third 
place  from  the  Apostles,  Clement  obtained  the  episco- 
pate,  who  had  both  seen  the  blessed  Apostles  and  had 
conversed  with  them."^  "  To  this  Clement  succeeded 
Evaristus,  and  to  Evaristus  Alexander ;  and  then  the 
sixth  from  the  Apostles,  Sixtus,  was  appointed  ;  and  after 
him  Telesphorus,  who  suffered  martyrdom  in  a  glorious 
manner ;  and  then  Hyginus,  afterwards  Pius,  after  whom 

1)  Acts  XX.  17.  2)  S.  Iren.  lib,  iii.  xiv.  2.  3)  Ibid.  lib.  iii.  3. 

4)  Ibid.  s.  2  5)  S.  Iren.  lib.  iii.  c.  3.  s.  3. 


92  THE    UNTTV    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Anicetus.  After  Soter  had  succeeded  to  Anicetiis,  Eleu- 
therius,  who  now,  the  twelfth  from  the  Apostles,  holds 
the  episcopate."^  We'  know  from  Eusebius  that,  in  the 
episcopate  of  Eleutherius,  Florinus  was  deposed  from  the 
order  of  Presbyters  in  the  Roman  Church  for  heresy.^ 
And  in  the  time  of  Cornelius,  w^ho  was  the  eighth  bishop 
after  Eleutherius,  the  Presbyters  in  Rome  were  forty- 
four  in  number.^ 

There  is  another  document  of  the  same  age  which 
will  exhibit  the  distinction  of  these  offices.  In  the  letter 
of  the  Christians  at  Lyons,  addressed  to  the  Churches  of 
Asia  and  Phrygia,  they  speak  of  their  Bishop  as  "  the 
blessed  Pothinus,  to  whom  was  intrusted  the  office  of  the 
episcopate  in  Lyons."^  Speaking  of  Irenseus,  in  a  letter 
to  Eleutherius,  they  say,  "  For  if  we  conceived  that  rank 
conferred  merit  upon  any,  we  would  earnestl}'  commend 
him  to  you  as  a  Presbyter  of  the  Church,  in  which  order 
he  is."  In  this  they  observe  the  distinction  of  the  two 
orders  with  great  exactness;  as  also  in  all  parts  of  the 
epistle.  For  Eleutherius,  who  was  a  bishop,  they  call 
"  Father,"  Irenaeus  only  "  brother,"  and  "colleague,"  and 
''fellow,"  with  themselves.  Eusebius,  who  preserves 
these  passages  of  their  letters,  narrates  the  history,  and 
tells  us,  "  These  same  martyrs  commended  Irenseus,  who 
was  then  a  Presbyter  in  the  diocese  of  Lyons,  to  the 
above-mentioned  Bishop  of  Rome."^  And  so  St.  Je- 
rome writes :  "  Irenseus,  Presbyter  to  Pothinus,  the  bishop 
who  then  ruled  the  Church  of  Lyons  in  Gaul,  was  sent 
as  legate  by  the  martyrs  of  that  place  to  Rome,  concern- 
ing certain  ecclesiastical  questions,  and  exhibited  to 
Eleutherius,  the  bishop,  honourable  letters  concerning 
himself     Afterwards,  when  Pothinus,  nearly  at  the  age 

1)   S.  Trcn.  lib.  iii.  c.  3.  s.  3.  2)  Hist.  EppI.  li!i.  v.  15. 

3)  Ibid.  lib.  vi.  43.  4)  I  bid.  lib.  v.  J. 

5)  Eu8eb.  Eccl.  Hist.  lib.  v,  4. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.  93 

of  ninety,  was  crowned  with  martyrdom  for  Christ,  he 
was  advanced  to  his  place.'" 

In  the  very  ancient  writings  called  the  Acts  of  St. 
Ignatius,  we  read  that  he,  "disbarking  from  the  ship 
with  great  joy,  hastened  to  see  St.  Polycarp,  the  bishop, 
who  had  been  a  fellow-hearer  (of  St.  John)  with  him- 
self" And  a  little  after:  "The  cities  and  Churches  of 
Asia  honoured  the  saint  through  their  bishops,  priests, 
and  deacons."^  Also  in  the  Acts  of  St.  Polycarp,  who, 
as  Irenseus,  his  disciple,  says,  was  ordained  Bishop  of 
Smyrna  by  the  Apostles,  he  is  called  "Polycarp,  the 
martyr  in  our  times,  much  to  be  admired,  the  Apostolic 
and  Prophetic  Doctor,  and  Bishop  of  the  Catholic  Church 
in  Smyrna."^ 

We  have  come  now  to  the  first  century  and  times  of 
the  Apostles,  in  which  lived  those  writers  who  by  pre- 
eminence are  called  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  as  having 
conversed  with  the  Apostles  themselves. 

St.  Hermas  evidently  refers  to  the  threefold  orders 
where  he  speaks  of  "the  Apostles,  and  bishops,  and  doc- 
tors, and  ministers,  wdio  through  the  mercy  of  God  have 
come  in  and  governed,  and  taught,  and  ministered  holily 
and  modestly  to  the  elect  of  God.'"^ 

St.  Clement,  also  writing  to  the  Corinthians,  draws  a 
parallel  between  the  Jewish  and  Christian  hierarchy,  and 
adds  :  "  To  the  high  priest  are  given  his  peculiar  func- 
tions ;  and  to  the  priests  their  own  place  is  appointed  ; 
and  on  the  Levites  their  proper  ministry  is  imposed  :  the 
layman  is  obliged  by  the  rules  of  the  laity.  Let  each 
of  you,  brethren,  in  his  own  order,  give  God  thanks  with 
a  good  conscience,  not  transgressing  the  defined  rule  of 


1)  S.  Hieion.  Catalog.  Script.  Eccl.  torn.  iv.  113.  ed.  Ben. 

2)  Martyiium  S.  Ignat.  s.  3.  Coteler.  Patr.  Apost.  torn.  ii.  159. 

3)  Martyrium  S.  Polycarpi.  s.  IG.  ibid.  p.  201. 

4)  S.  Hermae  Pastor.  Vis.  iii.  .5. 


94  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

his  ministry."^  As  a  comment  on  this  passage  may  be 
quoted  the  words  of  Jerome:  "And  that  we  may  know 
the  Aposiohcal  traditions  to  be  taken  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, what  Aaron,  and  his  sons,  and  the  Levites  were 
in  the  temple,  that  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons  have 
claim  to  be  in  the  Church.'"^ 

There  remains  now  only  St.  Ignatius,  from  whom,  in 
the  second  chapter,  we  have  already  quoted  enough. 
The  following  passage  or  two  will  suffice  to  close  up 
this  series.  In  his  epistle  to  the  Magnesians,  after  com- 
mending Damas,  the  bishop,  Bassa  and  Apollonius,  pres- 
byters, and  Sotion,  a  deacon,  he  goes  on  to  say,  "  The 
bishop  sits  the  first  in  order,  as  in  the  place  of  God,  and 
the  presbyters  as  the  synod  of  Apostles,  and  the  deacons, 
to  me  most  dear,  to  whom  is  intrusted  the  ministry  of 
Jesus  Christ."^  And  to  the  Srayrneans,  '•  Let  all  give 
heed  to  the  bishop  as  Jesus  Christ  to  the  Father,  and  to 
the  Presbytery  as  to  the  Apostles  ;  and  reverence  the 
deacons  as  the  commandment  of  God."'*  And  "  There 
is  one  flesh  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  one  cup  for  the 
union  of  His  blood,  one  altar,  as  one  bishop,  with  the  pres- 
byters and  deacons,  my  fellow-servants.'"^ 

Akhough  the  testimonies  here  adduced  are  from  the 
writings  of  uninspired  men,  there  are  yet  tW'O  points 
worthy  of  much  regard.  The  first  is  their  absolute  agree- 
ment; one  and  all  describing,  by  three  several  and  dis- 
tinct names,  the  three  several  and  distinct  orders  of 
bishop,  priest,  and  deacon,  as  the  threefold  offices  of  the 
one  apostolical  ministry.  The  next,  that  the  series  of 
accordant  witnesses  has  been  traced  up  to  the  very  life- 
time of  the  Apostles  of  Christ.  We  may  therefore  con- 
clude that  from  tlie  latter  part  of  the  apostolic  age  both 
the  names  and  offices  were  distinct  and  appropriate. 

1)  S  Clem.  1  Ep.  ad  Cor.  40.  comp,  42.        2)  Ad  Evangelum.  torn.  iv.  803. 
3)  Ad  Miigne:». »).  4)  Ad^myrn.8.  5)  Ad  Piiilad  4. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH  95 

We  will  now  go  on  to  ascertain  whether  the  same 
distinction  is  to  be  found  in  the  documents  of  the  inspired 
writers. 

That  the  present  inquiry  may  be  made  as  clear  and 
definite  as  possible,  I  will  here  state  beforehand  the  con- 
clusion in  which  it  will  terminate.  There  is  abundant 
evidence  to  show  that  if  in  the  apostolic  writings  the 
names  be  interchanged  among  the  three  orders,  yet  the 
offices  are  never  confounded. 

The  only  point  of  difference,  therefore,  between  the 
apostolic  and  post-apostolic  age  would  seem  to  be,  that 
the  names  had  then  become  technical  and  restricted  by 
second  intention  to  the  several  offices. 

But  before  I  bring  any  passages  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  show  the  possible  confusion  of  these  names,  I 
must  beg  the  reader's  most  careful  attention  to  the  fol- 
lowing passage  from  the  works  of  a  writer,  of  whom  it 
has  been  truly  said,  that  even  his  lightest  fragments  are 
as  the  filings  of  gold.  '^'  It  does  not  yet  appear  that  the 
names  bishop  and  presbyter  in  the  apostolic  writings  are 
synonymous,  where  the  offices  of  the  Church  are  spoken 
of.  Certainly,  the  arguments  wdiich  have  been  hitherto 
adduced  do  not  necessarily  compel  us  to  believe  it ;  and  it 
is  more  probable  that  such  a  common  use  of  these  words 
in  the  apostolic  writings  is  not  to  be  admitted.  Because, 
in  the  first  place,  if  we  examine  the  origin  of  this  inter- 
pretation, we  shall  find  the  first  who  brought  it  forward 
to  confirm  his  opinion  was  Aerius  the  heretic,  whose 
opinion  was  no  sooner  published  than  it  was  exploded  by 
St.  Epiphanius.  Secondly,  those  Catholics  who  after- 
wards embraced  the  same  interpretation  for  another  pur- 
pose, whether  you  take  the  ancients  or  the  moderns, 
have  never  been  able  to  agree  in  explaining  it.  If  all 
the  ways  which  can  be  contrived  or  fancied  to  explain 
this  community  of  the  two  names  should  be  exhibited, 


98  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

you  will  hardly  find  two  which  nobody  has  embraced, 
certainly  not  one  in  which  two,  or  perhaps  three,  have 
agreed,  excepting  those  who  professedly  and  wholly 
transcribe  from  others.  Whosever  conceives  the  idea  of 
the  community  of  these  two  names  must  necessarily  sup- 
pose that  there  existed  in  the  Churches,  first  founded  by 
the  care  and  auihoriiy  of  the  Apostles,  either  one  only 
order,  or  two  ;  and,  indeed,  they  who  contend  for  this 
community  of  names  are  divided  into  various  opinions 
concerning  the  number  of  orders  existing  at  that  time. 
All  acknowledge  that,  a  short  time  after  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  were  written,  two  orders  or  grades,  dis- 
tinct both  in  office  and  dignity,  obtained,  whether  by 
right  or  wrong,  in  the  Church ;  to  the  superior  of  which 
the  name  of  bishop,  to  the  inferior  of  presbyter,  was 
attached.  They  who  think  that  only  one  of  these  existed 
while  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  being  writ- 
ten, and  that  the  other  was  afterwards  added,  acknow- 
ledge either  the  inferior  order,  above  which  the  supe- 
rior was  afterwards  placed,  or  the  superior,  to  which  the 
inferior  was  afterwards  supplied.  Hence  arise  two  ways 
of  explaining  the  community  of  the  names — one,  that  the 
names  of  bishop  and  presbyter  were  indiscriminately 
given  to  the  priests  of  one  order,  who  were  called  priests 
of  the  inferior  order,  or  presbyters,  after  the  superior 
order  was  introduced  and  placed  over  them  ;  which  opin- 
ion, they  say,  is  that  of  St.  Jerome,  and  I  do  not  contest 
it:  the  other,  that  the  same  names  were  indiscriminately 
given  to  the  priests  of  one  order,  who  were  called  priests 
of  the  superior  order  or  bishops,  after  the  inferior  order 
was  introduced  and  placed  under  them  ;  which  opinion 
Hammond,  than  whom  no  one  has  handled  the  subject 
more  accurately,  defends  as  the  most  likely.  They  who 
do  not  doubt  that  in  the  Aposlles'  times,  and  by  their  in- 
stitution, tliere  were  two  orders  distinct  both  in  office  and 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  97 

dignity,  are  divided  into  more  opinions  concerning  the 
community  of  the  names.  Of  which  opinions  the  first 
was,  that  at  that  time  either  name  was  common  to  either 
order;  so  that  they  who  were  advanced  to  the  superior 
order  were  called  sometimes  bishops  and  sometimes  pres- 
byters ;  and  in  like  manner  they  that  were  ordained  to 
the  inferior  grade  were  named  sometimes  presbyters  and 
sometimes  bishops,  which  was  the  opinion  of  Chrysostom 
and  his  followers.  But  the  second  opinion  was,  that  the 
name  bishop  and  presbyter  was  given  inditferendy  and 
indiscriminately  to  the  priests  of  the  inferior  order ;  but 
neither  of  them  to  those  of  the  first  order,  or  the  bishops, 
because  at  that  time  the  priests  of  the  first  order  w^ere 
called  Apostles,  which  was  the  opinion  of  Theodoret. 
Besides  these,  two  other  conjectures  ma}^  be  formed,  i.  e., 
that  the  priests  of  the  superior  order  were  sometimes 
called  bishops  and  sometimes  presbyters,  but  those  of 
the  inferior — presbyters  only,  w^hich  Hammond  admits 
as  likely  ;  or  that  the  priests  of  the  inferior  order  were 
sometimes  called  presbyters  and  sometimes  bishops,  but 
those  of  the  superior — bishops  only,  which  no  one  has 
embraced.  Since  there  is  so  great  dissension  among 
all  w^ho  think  they  have  discovered  the  community  of 
these  names  in  Scripture,  and  their  various  opinions, 
which  are  almost  as  m.any  as  there  are  men,  can  in  no 
way  be  reconciled,  it  is  rendered  still  more  probabL^-  that 
such  a  community  of  names  is  not  indeed  to  be  found  in 
Scripture  at  all."^ 

We  may  now  shortly  state  the  case  as  it  relates  to 
the  usage  of  these  names  in  Holy  Scripture  ;  always 
remembering  that  no  argument  will  be  drawn  from  it. 
In  the  New  Testament  the  words  iTzCay.onoq^  yxQ^a^vTBooq, 
and  dLay.oroq.,  bishop,   priest,    and   deacon,  or   overseer, 

1)    Bishop  Pearson's  Vindicise  Ignatianae,  cap.  xiii.  Coteler  Pat.  Apost. 
ii.  427. 


98         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

elder,  and  minister,  with  their  cognates,  iTZiaxonri,  nqta- 
^vTfQLDv,  and  6cay.6ria,  episcopate,  presbytery,  diaconate 
or  oversight,  eldership,  and  ministry,  are  used  in  various 
w^ays,  which  may,  however,  be  reduced  to  two — general 
and  ecclesiastical. 

Of  the  general  use  the  following  will  be  sufficient  ex- 
amples. 

Our  Lord  says  of  Jerusalem,  that  she  knew  not  the 
time  of  her  visitation  :  xhr  y.aiohv  rtjq  iTnay.onrjq.^ 

We  read  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  that, 
"  through  faith,  the  elders  (ot-  7tQsn)9vreQoiy  obtained  a 
good  report."  In  the  parable  of  the  wedding  garment 
the  king  commands  the  servants  (roiq  dtay.6rnt.q^)  to  bind 
the  intruder  and  cast  him  forth.  Our  Lord  says  to  His 
disciples,  "  Whosoever  will  be  great  among  you,  let  him 
be  your  minister"  (^6idy.ovoq)^  And  of  Martha  we  read 
that  she  "was  cumbered  about  much  serving"  (Jtaxor^'a)').^ 

This  general  sense  of  the  words  by  restriction  be- 
came ecclesiastical. 

And  first  of  the  Jewish  Church.  The  words  inlaxoTzoq 
and* fTTiaxoTtr]  do  not  occur  in  the  New  Testament  as  ap- 
plied to  the  Church  of  the  Jews.  But  the  word  bishopric 
(^TTKjy.oTTri)  is  quoted  from  the  109Lh  Psalm  by  St.  Peter — 
"  And  his  bishopric  let  another  take"  (xal  rtjv  iTtiay.oTtijv 
ai'Tov  ).d,3oi  fTfonq).^  In  the  Septuagint  the  w^ord  into- 
y.oTznq  is  of  frequent  occurrence.  In  Numb.  xxxi.  14,  the 
captain  of  the  host  is  ^nlay.nTtoq  rJjq  Swd^uoyq.  In  2  Chron. 
xxxiv.  12,  17,  the  chief  among  the  workmen.  In  Neh. 
xi.  9,  14,  the  ruler  or  prince  of  the  city  ;  and  ch.  v.  10,  the 
chief  of  the  priests:  in  verse  15  the  chief  of  the  Levites 
is  called  ^nlay.onoq.  Eleazar  the  son  o(  Aaron,  (who  in 
Numbers  iii.  32  is  called  ctn/oi'Twr  twi-  AnnToJr  ao/ojr,  the 

1)  St.  Luke  xix.  44.    See  also  1  St.  Pet.  ii.  12,  2)  Hob.  xi.  2. 

3)  St.  Mattli.  XX ii.  13.  4)  Ibid.  xx.  26.  5)  St.  Luke  x.  40. 

6)  Pd,  cix.  8.     For  what  follows,  see  Hammond's  note  on  Acts  i.  20. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  99 

ruler  of  the  rulers  of  the  Levites,)  in  Numbers  iv.  16  is 
called  irciay.oTToq'Ehdtao.^  In  2  Kings  xi.  18,  he  that 
was  set  over  the  house  of  the  Lord  is  called  tnCay.onoq 
iTtt  TOP  oiy.nv  y.voCov.  In  all  these  several  uses  the  idea 
of  precedence  and  ruling  power  is  expressed. 

In  a  multitude  of  places  throughout  the  New  Testa- 
ment the  word  "  elder"  or  "  presbyter"  signifies  a  mem- 
ber of  the  sanhedrim  or  council  of  the  Jews,  and  Tzo^a^v- 
TfQtov,  the  council  itself.  In  this  all  nations  have  alike 
concurred,  as  the  yfoovrsq  and  yfooi'oYa  in  the  Greek 
states,  and  "  Senatus"  among  the  Latins  In  this  sense 
we  read  of  "the  tradition  of  the  elders,"^  the  "elders  and 
chief  priests,"^  the  "  council  of  the  people"  (^nqfolivreinov 
Tov  Aaou),^  ''the  estate  of  the  elders.''^  In  all  which 
passages  it  is  plain  that  the  words  signify  a  collective, 
deliberative,  and  ruling  body,  subject  to  the  chief  priests.^ 

The  words  "deacon"  and  "diaconate"  nowhere  occur 
in  the  New  Testament  as  applied  to  the  Jewish  Church. 

I  now  come  to  the  use  of  these  words  as  applied  to 
the  Church  of  Christ. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  word  "  bishopric" 
(imay.oTTtj)  is  applied  by  St.  Luke  to  the  Apostolate  of 
Judas.  We  find  it  again  used  by  St.  Paul  in  writing  to 
Timothy,  as  expressing  the  episcopate  or  oversight 
(whether  singly  or  conjointly  must  be  determined  by 
other  evidence)  of  a  particular  church.^    St.  Paul  charges 

1)  Isai.  Ix.  17,  Lxx.  f  a'  SoJau)  rovg  ap^ovrdi  cov  iv  eipfivr] ,  Ka\  rovs 
eTTiiTKOTTJVS  (TOV  tv  SiKaioavvT).  Quoted  thus  by  St.  Clement,  1  Ep.  ad,  Coi. 
c.  42: — "cai  tovto  (i.  e.,  the  institution  of  bishops  and  deacons  by  the  Apos- 
tles) oil  KaivCis  Ik  '  yap  6n  noWuiv  ■^povojv  eyeypaTrro  Trepl  eTia>.6~0M'  kuI 
Siaxovwv.  OvTWS  yap  TTov  }^iyEi  f]  ypatpfi'  "  KaraaTriaco  roui  s-i-kottovs 
dvTOJv  iv  SiKaioavvri J  Koi  rovj  SiUKOpovs  avTuv  iv  ttictci.' 

2)  St,  Matth.  XV.  2.  3)  St,  Mark  viii.  31. 

4)  St.  Luke  XX ii.  66.  5)  Acts  xxii.  6. 

6)  Hammond*s  Paraphr.  on  New  Test.,  note  on  Acts  xi.  26. 

7)  1  Tim.  iii.  1. 


100        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  presbyters  or  elders  (toi'i;  noBa(ivrfQovq  rrjq  ixy.Xrjrf'aq)^ 
who  met  him  at  Miletus,  to  take  heed  to  the  flock  over 
which  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  them  overseers  or 
bishops  (^Tziay.o.rovq).^  He  also  salutes  the  Philippian 
Church  "with  the  bishops  and  deacons."^  He  tells 
Titus  a  bishop  should  be  blameless.''  Here  we  find  the 
Milesian  presbyters  addressed  as  bishops,  and  a  saluta- 
tion omitting  the  presbytery  sent  to  only  two  orders  in 
the  Church  at  Philippi.  Also,  in  the  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
an  immediate  transition  is  made  from  the  office  of  a 
bishop  to  that  of  a  deacon.^ 

So  again  we  find  with  the  word  "presbyter"  or  "elder." 
We  read  of  "  the  apostles  and  elders,"^  "  tlie  elders  and 
brethren,"''  "  the  elders  of  the  church  ;"^  in  all  which 
places  "  presbyters"  will  equally  stand.  St.  James  speaks 
of  "the  elders  of  the  church"^  for  the  ministry  generally. 
St.  Peter  exhorts  the  elders  or  presbyters  to  feed  the 
flock  of  God.i" 

St.  Paul  charges  Timothy  to  cherish  the  gift  that  was 
given  to  him  by  "  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  pres- 
bytery."'^ 

Now  in  all  this  there  is  not  so  much  as  a  word  of 
bishop  or  bishopric. 

And  to  make  this  apparent  ambiguity  greater,  we 
find  the  Apostles  nowhere  call  themselves  bishops.  We 
find  St.  Peter  and  St.  John  calling  themselves  presby- 
ters.'^ St.  Paul  calls  Tychicus  a  deacon,'^  and  Timothy 
a  deacon,'^  and  himself  a  deacon,^^  and  all  the  Apostles 
deacons   twice  over  ;'®  and,  as  if  to  banish  from    our 


1)   Acts  XX.  17.  2)  Ibid.  28.  3)  Phil.  i.  1,            4)  Tit.  i.  7. 

5)  1  Tim.  iii.  1,  8.  6)  Acts  xv.  2,  4, 6.  7)  Ibid.  23.              8)  xx.  17. 

9)  St.  Jam.  V.  14.  10)  1  St.  Pet.  v.  1,2.  11)  1  'J"im.  iv.  14. 

12)  1  Sf.  Peter  v.  1 ;  1  St.  John  ii.  I ;  iii.  I.  13)  Eph.  vi.  21. 

14)  1  Tim.  iv.  6.  15)  Eph.  iii.  7.  16)  1  Cor.  iv   1  j  2  Cor.  iii.  6. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  101 

minds  the  whole  question  of  names,  he  calls  Apollos  an 
apostle/  and  Epaphroditus  an  apostle.^ 

Certainly,  if  the  interchange  of  names  be  at  all  a 
refutative  argument,  then  there  did  not  exist,  as  a  dis- 
tinct office,  Deacon,  Presbyter,  Bishop,  or  Apostle.  They 
who  contend  that  the  names  are  thus  common  and  indis- 
criminate must  abide  the  full  issue  of  their  principle.  To 
say  that  a  word  is  used  here  in  a  wider,  and  there  in  a 
restricted  sense — that  in  one  place  the  Apostle  would 
magnify  the  office  of  his  fellow-workers — and  in  another 
depress  his  own  dignity,  is  but  to  admit  a  principle  of 
sound  criticism,  by  which,  if  applied  at  all,  they  also  must 
consistently  and  fairly  abide.  The  issue  would  not  be 
doubtful,  though  very  adverse  to  their  purpose  in  adopt- 
ing it.  Now  it  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  seeming 
laxity  with  which  these  names  are  used  in  the  apostolic 
writings  presents  at  first  sight  no  small  difficulty.  But 
it  is  equally  certain  that  the  way  to  make  the  difficulty  a 
thousand-fold  greater  is  to  attempt  a  verbal  proof  from 
the  several  names  without  investigating  the  facts  of  the 
case.  We  should  not  only  be  committing  ourselves  to  a 
mistaken  view  of  the  matter  from  which  the  proof  is  to  be 
derived,  but  also  to  a  false  principle  on  which  the  investi- 
gation is  to  be  conducted.  "To  contend  about  the  names 
of  bishops  or  presbyters  is  nothing  more  than  walking 
upon  air ;  and  so  to  propound  the  dispute  that  there 
never  can  be  an  end  of  disputing  :"^  the  real  question 
being  whether  the  Apostles,  before  they  departed  this 
life,  committed  the  ultimate  power  of  ruling  the  Church, 
and  ordaining  others,  to  any  one  person  in  each  church,  or 


1)  1  Cor.  iv,  6,  conf.  9.Vid.    Suic.  Thesaur.  in  voc.  dTrdoroAof . 

2)  Philip,  ii,  25  :  (JvarpariwTriv  jiov  Vfidiv  6l  drr6aTo\ov. 

3)  "  De  nominibus  enim  Episcoporum  et  Presbyterorum  contendere  nihil 
aliud  est  quam  dEpo/Jareii/,  et  disputationem  ita  instituere,  ut  null  us  sit 
disputandi  finis."    Bishop  Beveridge,  in  Cod.  Com.,  &c.,  lib.  ii.  c.  xi.  13. 


102  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

to  many,  that  is,  according  to  the  modern  formula, 
whether  to  a  bishop,  or  to  a  body  of  presbyters  ?'  When 
we  have  come  to  a  conclusion  on  this  point,  we  shall  find 
that  the  names  in  the  apostolic  writings  will  for  the  most 
part  fall  into  their  own  places.  But,  after  all,  whether 
we  succeed  or  no  in  adjusting  the  use  of  these  several 
titles^  the  facts  of  history  will  prove  that  the  offices  were 
distinct ;  and  on  this  alone  we  rest. 

We  must  remember,  then,  that  the  point  is  not  to  be 
decided  by  quoting  the  first  acts  of  the  apostles,  imme- 
diately after  our  Lord's  ascension,  when  they  were  on 
the  threshold  of  their  ministry.'^  He  that  searches  for 
dogmatic  proofs  (for  the  co-optation  of  Matthias  is  a 
practical  one)  of  the  apostolical  succession  at  the  time 
the  Apostles  were  only  themselves  succeeding  to  the 
sole  apostolate^  of  our  Lord,  must  have  a  mind  strangely 
exacting,  or  eccentric  in  its  reasoning  process :  or  he 
that  looks  to  find  from  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  an 
entire  hierarchy,  with  all  its  supplements  and  comple- 
ments of  order  and  office,  must  have  a  mind  as  strangely 
unskilled  in  the  analogies  of  God's  works.  The  notion 
that  the  Church  was  perfected  in  all  its  organic  parts, 
uno  aposioloman  affiatu,  by  the  first  breath  of  St.  Peter 
and  the  Apostles,  has  no  foundation  in  the  testimony 
either  of  inspired  or  uninspired  history.  On  the  contrary, 
not  only  the  analogy  of  all  God's  inanimate  and  animate 
works,  but  also  His  earlier  dispensations,  w^ould  lead  us 
beforehand  to  look  for  what  in  Holy  Scripture  we  find.* 
We  may  take  therefore  the  beginning  of  the  Book  of  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  beginning  of  the  Book  of  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John  as  the  two  extreme  points  of  the 
Apostolic   ministry  as  recorded  by  inspired   men.     Be- 

1)  Bishop  Beveiidge,  in  Cod.  Com.,  &c.,  lib.  ii.  c.  xi.  13. 

2)  Ibid. 

3)  "  As  my  Fathei  hath  sent  me,  even  30  send  I  you." — St.  John,  zx.  21. 

4)  S.  Epiph.  adv.  Haer.  lib.  ill.  torn.  i.  v. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  103 

tween  these  two  extremes  we  may  trace  the  growth  and 
development  of  the  Church ;  and  how,  according  to  its 
necessities,  some  organic  provision  to  maintain  its  health 
and  energy  was  supplied.  The  point  to  be  ascertained 
is  not  so  much  what  the  Apostles  did  when  they  began 
to  found  the  Church,  as  how  they  left  it  when  they  had 
finished  the  work  which  their  Lord  had  given  them  to  do. 

And  first,  we  have  the  witness  of  Scripture  that  the 
number  of  twelve,  which  had  been  determined  by  the 
Lord  Himself  for  the  fellowship  of  His  Apostles,  was 
carefully  and  designedly  kept  up,  by  the  co-optation  of 
Matthias  into  the  place  of  Judas. 

The  twelve,  with  the  rest  of  the  Disciples,  in  all  one 
hundred  and  twenty,  were  the  whole  Church  of  Christ. 

The  seventy  disciples,  who,  as  the  Evangelists  re- 
cord, had  been  choren  and  sent  forth  by  our  Lord,  do 
not  appear  again  as  a  distinct  body  in  the  apostolic  writ- 
ings :  but  that  they  continued  in  the  fellowship  of  the 
Apostles,  and  that  their  original  commission,  which,  so 
far  as  we  read,  had  never  been  revoked  by  our  Lord,  was 
not  rescinded  by  His  Apostles,  no  one  can  doubt. 

We  then  read  of  the  selection  and  ordination  of  seven 
men  to  a  subordinate  and  secular  office.  The  seven 
deacons,  as  we  are  wont  to  call  them,  were  set  apart  to 
a  function  which  is  placed  in  diametrical  contradistinc- 
tion from  the  spiritual  office  of  the  Apostles.  They  were 
ordained  to  serve  tables,  that  the  Apostles,  being  exempt 
from  that  secular  burden,  might  without  distraction  give 
themselves  to  prayer,  and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word. 
Thus  far  the  Diaconate  was  a  simply  secular  office  ;  and 
yet  we  find  it  imposed  upon  men,  of  whom  two,  Stephen 
and  Philip,  immediately  appear  preaching  and  baptizing 
in  the  name  of  Christ.  Either,  then,  as  some  think,  they 
were  already  of  the  number  of  the  seventy  whom  our 
Lord  had  commissioned  to  preach ;  or  the  laying  on  of 


104         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

the  hands  of  the  Apostles  did  confer  a  restricted  spiritual 
office,  to  which  the  secular  function,  though  it  was  the  end 
for  which  they  were  required,  was  but  incidental.  I  say 
a  restricted  office,  because,  after  that  Philip  had  preached 
and  baptized  at  Samaria,  the  Apostles  Peter  and  John 
were  sent  thither  to  lay  hands  upon  those  that  had  re- 
ceived PhJHp's  baptism.'  This  is  a  fact  of  much  impor- 
tance, inasmuch  as  it  proves,  beyond  controversy,  that 
the  Apostles,  out  of  the  plentitude  of  their  ghostly  author- 
ity, communicated  a  portion  of  their  functions,  and  con- 
stituted an  inferior  order  with  a  restricted  power,  which 
was  a  development  or  oflfshoot  of  their  own  commission. 
The  date  of  this  transaction  was  about  the  year  a.  d.  37, 
and  before  the  Apostles  lel't  Jerusalem.^  We  then  read 
of  the  conversion  of  St.  Paul,  of  his  going  up  to  Jerusa- 
lem, of  the  vision  of  St.  Peter  at  Joppa,  of  the  admission 
of  the  Gentiles  in  the  person  of  Cornelius;  then  of  St. 
Peter's  going  to  justify  himself  to  the  Apostles  and  breth- 
ren in  Jerusalem :  then  of  the  spread  of  the  Gospel  in 
Phoenice,  Cyprus,  and  Antioch,  to  which  place  Barnabas 
was  sent  from  Jerusalem  about  the  year  a.  d.  43,  that  is 
six  years,  or  more,  after  the  ordination  of  the  deacons. 
Up  to  this  time  we  have  heard  of  none  but  the  Apostles 
and  Deacons,  and  now  for  the  first  time  we  read  of  Pres- 
byters. The  Christians  of  Antioch  made  a  gathering  for 
the  relief  of  the  brethren  in  Judasa,  sgainst  the  famine 
which  Agabus  foretold,  and  sent  "  it  to  the  elders  (7T()oq 
rovq  TTQsa^vtfQnxiq)  by  the  hands  of  Barnabas  and  Saul." 
Before  I  make  any  remark  upon  this  newly  emergent 
feature  in  the  primitive  system,  I  must  first  observe  that 
hitherto,  that  is,  for  the  space  of  at  least  ten  years,  we 
know  from  Scripture  of  no  orders  in  the  Church  at  Jeru- 
salem but  Apostles  and  Deacons.  It  would  seem  that 
this  was  the  polity  which  was  first  required,   and  there- 

1)  Acts  viii.  14, 17.  2>  Ibid  viii.  1. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  105 

fore  first  developed,  in  the  beginnings  of  a  Church;  and 
this  seems  to  hold  good  also  at  Philippi :  by  which  suppo- 
sition we  might  not  improbably  solve  the  omission  of  Pres- 
byters in  St.  Paul's  salutation  of  that  Church  ;  and  like- 
wise the  apparent  omission  in  his  instructions  to  Timo- 
thy.^ I  say,  the  apparent  omission  in  the  Epistle  to  Tim- 
othy ;  for  Presbyters  are  not  really  omitted,  but  twice 
most  distinctly  and  expressly  spoken  of  ^  Moreover,  if 
real  omissions  were  conclusive  proofs,  there  would  seem 
to  have  been  no  Deacons  in  the  churches  of  Crete  ;  for, 
in  the  Epistle  to  Titus,  St.  Paul  describes  only  the  char- 
acter and  qualifications  necessary  for  Presbyters  or 
Bishops.^  But  this  would  prove  too  much.  After  all, 
nothing  can  be  proved  from  omissions,  but  the  gradual 
development  of  the  several  Churches,  which  the  facts  of 
history  also  confirm. 

We  have  next  to  consider  the  origin  and  the  func- 


1)  So  St.  Clement  of  Rome  :  "  Christ  was  sent  from  God,  and  the  Apos- 
tles from  Christ,  and  they  went  forth  preaching  the  Gospel  ....  as  they 
preached  in  the  countries  and  cities  they  constituted  their  first  fruits,  after 
approving  them  by  the  Spirit,  as  Bishops  and  Deacons  of  those  that  should 
believe."  Ep.  i.  ad  Cor.  42.  As  also  St,  Cyprian:  "Deacons  ought  to 
remember  that  the  Apostles,  that  is.  Bishops  and  Rulers,  the  Lord  himself 
chose  out ;  but  that  the  Deacons,  after  the  ascension  of  the  Lord  into 
heaven,  the  Apostles  instituted,  to  be  ministers  of  their  Episcopate,  and  of 
the  Church."  Ep,  ad,  Rogat,  Ixv,  ed,  Ben,  To  the  same  effect  St,  Epipha- 
nius  says,  that  the  Apostles  developed  the  orders  gradually,  according  to  the 
state  of  each  several  Church  ;  in  some  places  ordaining  Presbyters  and  Dea- 
cons, reserving  the  Episcopate  ;  in  others,  a  Bishop  and  Deacons,  reserving 
the  Presbyterate :  for  instance,  he  says,  in  explaining  the  use  of  the  names 
in  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  "  Where  there  was  none  fit  or  worthy  to  be  a  Bishop, 
the  place  remained  void  without  any :  when  need  required,  and  there  were 
those  that  were  fit  for  it.  Bishops  were  constituted ;  but  while  there  was  no 
great  multitude  of  Christians,  there  were  found  none  among  thom  to  be  con- 
stituted Presbyter,  and  they  contented  themselves  with  a  Bishop  alone  :  yet 
without  a  Deacon  it  was  impossible  for  a  Bishop  to  be,  and  therefore  the 
Apostle  took  care  that  the  Bishop  should  have  his  Deacons  to  minister  to 
him,"    S.  Epiphan.  lib,  iii.  t  1.     See  also  s.  v. 

2)  1  Tim.  V,  7,  8,  9.  3)  Tit.  i,  7. 

6 


106  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

tions  of  Presbyters,  as  they  now  for  the  first  time  appear 
in  the  Church  of  Jerusalem. 

It  is  remarkable  that  we  have  no  record  of  the  insti- 
tution of  these  Presbyters.  We  find  them  existing  as  a 
body  in  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  but  there  is  not  a  trace 
of  their  first  rise.  It  would  be  well  if  they  who  rest  so 
much  on  names  would  observe  this  fact. 

That  the  office  of  Presbyter  was  not  the  same  as  that 
of  the  Deacons  is  confessed  on  all  hands. 

That  it  was  not  the  same  as  that  of  the  Apostles  is 
equally  plain,  for  we  find  the  Apostles  and  Presbyters 
carefully  distinguished,  as  in  the  following  passages.  In 
the  discussions  which  arose  about  circumcision,  Paul  and 
Barnabas  went  up  "  to  Jerusalem  unto  the  Apostles  and 
Presbyters ;'"  "  they  were  received  of  the  Church  and  of 
the  Apostles  and  Presbyters.'"^  "The  Apostles  and 
Presbyters  came  together  for  to  consider  of  this  matter."^ 
•'  Then  pleased  it  the  Apostles  and  Presbyters  and  the 
whole  Church  to  send  chosen  men."^  "  And  they  wrote 
letters  by  them  after  this  manner :  The  Apostles,  Pres- 
byters, and  Brethren  send  greeting."^  "  And  as  they 
went  through  the  cities  ihey  delivered  them  the  decrees 
for  to  keep,  that  were  ordained  of  the  Apostles  and  Pres- 
byters which  were  at  Jerusalem."^  Now  it  is  here  to  be 
observed  that,  be  the  Presbyters  what  they  may,  they 
are  distinguished  from  the  Apostles  and  named  after 
them  in  every  case.  I  know  of  no  instance  in  which  this 
precedence  is  not  observed.  It  must  also  be  remarked 
that  at  this  same  time  one  of  the  Apostles  stood  in  a  very 
conspicuous  and  peculiar  relation  to  the  Presbyters  at 
Jerusalem.  It  is  true  that  Scripture  does  not  exactly  de- 
fine it ;  but  there  are  sufficient  indications  of  a  personal 


1)  Acts  XV.  2.  2)   Ibid.  4.  3)  Ibid.  6. 

4)  Ibid.  22.  5)  Ibid.  23.  6)  Ibid.  xvi.  4. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  107 

and  peculiar  authority  vested  in  St.  James.  When  St. 
Peter  was  dehvered  out  of  prison  by  the  angel,  his  first 
care,  as  soon  as  he  entered  the  house  of  Mary,  was  to 
send  and  make  known  his  safety  "  to  James  and  to  the 
brethren."'  At  St.  Paul's  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  after 
his  conversion  we  find  James,  Cephas,  and  John  mention- 
ed, James  being  named  first '^  When,  at  the  council  at 
Jerusalem,  St  Peter  had  stated  his  opinion  on  the  ques- 
tion of  circumcision,  it  was  James  that  summed  up  the 
discussion,  and  gave  the  definitive  sentence  on  which  the 
council  proceeded  to  act^  And  again  at  St.  Paul's  last 
visit  to  Jerusalem,  we  read  he  "  went  in  unto  James,  and 
all  the  Presbyters  were  present."^  And  he  saluted  them 
and  gave  an  account  of  his  ministry  among  the  Gentiles. 
No  one  can  doubt  that  this  account  of  St.  Paul's  minis- 
try was  rendered  to  the  Church  of  Jerusalem,  then  and 
there  duly  assembled,  and  James  is  named  at  the  head 
of  it.  As  I  have  strictly  confined  myself  to  Holy  Scrip- 
lure  in  this  part  of  the  present  chapter,  I  forbear  to  intro- 
duce into  the  text  collateral  prools  of  the  historical  fact 
that   St.   James   was  Bishop   of  that  Church.^     These 

1)   Acts  xii.  17.  2)   Gal.  i.  19,  and  ii.  9. 

3)   Gal.  XV.  13.  4)   Ibid.  xxi.  18. 

5)  "At  Acts  xii.  17,  theie  ia  such  a  distinct  and  special  mention  of 
James,  the  brother  of  our  Lord,  as  justifies  us  in  supposing  that  he  already 
possessed  a  specific  rank  in  the  Church  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  yet  it  is  the  first 
of  the  kind,  and  it  comes  in,  as  we  see,  at  the  Passover  of  U.  C.  796,  (A.  D. 
42,)  after  the  conversion  of  Cornelius.  It  is  an  unquestionable  fact  that  this 
James  was  Bishop  of  Jerusalem.  And  if  he  had  been  appointed  subsequently 
to  the  conversion  of  Cornelius,  U.  C.  794,  it  would  do  much  to  confirm  the 
tradition  above  alluded  to,  that  for  twelve  years  the  Apostles  were  not  to 
leave  Jerusalem]  and,  consequently,  that  at  the  end  of  twelve  they  were. 
While  they  were  all  in  Jerusalem,  and  all  actively  engaged  on  the  spot,  it 
is  reasonable  to  presume  they  would  all  be  at  the  head  of  the  Church  alike  ; 
and  so,  from  Acts  vi.  2 ;  viii.  1—14  ;  ix.  27,  32  ;  xi.  1,  before  this  point  of 
time  in  U.  C.  795,  they  are  manifestly  seen  to  be.  But  when  they  were 
beginning  to  prepare  for  the  business  of  preaching  the  Gospel  on  a  moie 
enlarged  scale  than  before,  and  in  other  parts  of  the  world  besides  Judtea, 


108        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

indications  of  Scripture  are  enough  for  my  present  pur- 
pose, which  is  to  show  that  in  every  case  the  Apostles 
are  referred  to  as  distinct  from  and  superior  to  Presby- 
ters, and  that  St.  James  had  a  visible  precedence  in  rank 
and  office.  There  is  only  one  more  mention  of  Presbyters 
in  the  Book  of  Acts.  In  the  fourteenth  chapter  we  read 
of  St.  Paul's  first  preaching  among  the  Geniiles  of  Asia. 
This  was  about  the  year  a.  d.  44.  In  the  23rd  verse  we 
read  that  Paul  and  Barnabas  "  ordained  them  Presbyters 
in  every  city."^  Here  we  have  the  first  and  only  record 
of  such  an  ordination  in  the  Book  of  Acts.  Now,  of 
whatsoever  rank  and  power  these  were,  it  is  manifest 
they  stood  in  the  same  relation  to  the  Apostles  Paul  and 
Barnabas  that  the  Presbyters  of  Jerusalem  stood  in  to 
the  rest  of  the  Apostles,  and  to  James  the  Just.  They 
were  of  the  same  order  with  those  of  whom  we  read  that 
they  were  convened  by  St.  Paul  to  Miletus,  i.  e.,  "  the 
Presbyters  of  the  Church"^  of  Ephesus.  It  seems  highly 
probable,  according  to  the  view  already  advanced  on  the 
authority  of  St.  Epiphanius,^  that  in  these  churches  there 
were  none  mature  enough  in  the  faith  for  the  charge  of 
the  Episcopate.  They  were  necessarily  new  converts, 
or  "  novices ;"  and  for  that  reason,  by  the  judgment  of 
St.  Paul,  unfit  for  the  office  of  a  Bishop.^  The  Apostles 
therefore  ordained  Presbyters,  or  teachers,  reserving  to 

the  necessity  of  appointing  some  one  to  reside  with,  and  to  preside  over  the 
mother  Church  permanently,  would  be  evident  even  to  ordinary  wisdom  and 
prudence  :  in  which  case  (if  the  choice  were  not  dictated  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
himself)  none  was  so  likely  to  be  selected  for  the  government  of  a  Church, 
which  consisted  exclusively  of  the  brethren  of  Christ  according  to  the  flesh, 
as  James,  the  brother  of  Christ  according  to  the  flesh."  Creswell's  Har- 
mony of  the  Gospels,  vol.  ii.  58.  The  historical  proofs  are  given  in  full  by 
Bishop  Taylor  in  his  Episcopacy  Asserted,  &c..  sect.  xiii. ;  by  Cave,  in  the 
history  of  St.  James  the  Less,  contained  in  his  Lives  of  the  Apostles  ;  and 
by  Hammond,  Letter  of  Resolution  to  Six  Queries,  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  511. 

1)   Acts  xiv.  32.  2)   Acts  xx.  17.  3)  See  p.  105,  and  note. 

4)   1  Tim.  iii.  6. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  109 

themselves  the  government  of  the  Churches,  which,  as 
we  expressly  read  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  St.  Paul  exercised 
in  his  apostolic  journeys  throughout  Asia.^  Of  Presby- 
ters we  do  not  once  read  in  any  of  the  apostolic  epistles 
until  we  come  to  the  First  to  Timothy.  In  the  absence 
of  all  other  lights  from  Holy  Scripture,  it  is  reasonable 
to  conclude  that  these  Presbyters  were  an  order  consti- 
tuted by  the  Apostles,  when  the  multitude  of  Christians 
increased,  to  aid  them  in  the  spiritual  functions  of  the 
Apostolate,  as  the  Deacons  were  first  constituted,  when 
''the  number  of  the  disciples  was  multiplied,"^  to  relieve 
them  of  the  secular  office  of  distributing  the  alms  of  the 
Church.  At  first  they  needed  assistants  only  in  the  low- 
er, afterwards  also  in  the  higher  functions ;  and  what 
was  true  in  any  church,  as  at  Jerusalem,  by  reason  of 
the  multitude  of  churches,  was  true  also  in  other  churches 
by  reason  of  the  absence  of  the  Apostles.  In  the  jour- 
neys of  St.  Paul  he  must  needs  leave  each  several  church 
as  he  founded  it,  and  pass  on  to  other  cities.  Therefore 
he  left  men  charged  with  spiritual  functions,  reserving  to 
himself  the  oversight. 

But  still  there  remains  this  difficulty:  St.  Paul  calls 
the  Presbyters  who  met  him  at  Miletus  "  Bishops."  And 
in  his  Epistle  to  Titus  it  would  seem  as  if  the  two  names 
were  indiscriminately  used,  and  the  two  apparent  offices 
were  one  and  the  same.'  Let  us  make  the  most  of  the 
difficulty.  The  Bishops  and  Deacons  at  Philippi  might 
then  be  only  Presbyters  and  Deacons,  and  St.  Paul's 
Epistle  to  Timothy  would  seem  to  show  that  these  were 
the  only  two  orders  existing  at  that  time.  This,  I  be- 
lieve, is  the  full  force  of  which  the  objection  is  capable. 
Now  let  it  be  observed  that  the  controversy  turns  upon 
these  two  passages.     Let  them,  for  a  moment,  be  sup- 

1)  Acts  XV.  36.  2)   Acts  vi.  1.  3)   Titus  i.  5—7. 


110         THE  UNITY  OP  THE  CHURCH. 

posed  not  to  exist,  and  the  others  may  be  explained  on  the 
principle  stated  by  St.  Epiphanius.  We  are  therefore 
testing  the  expressions,  not  of  many  passages,  but  of  two 
only :  no  others  have  the  same  verbal  ambiguity  ;  and  in 
these  two,  it  would  certainly  seem  that  St.  Paul  calls  the 
same  persons  at  one  time  Presbyters,  and  at  another 
Bishops. 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  state  that  it  has  been  thought, 
by  some  well  versed  in  the  records  of  the  Church,  that 
both  the  Presbyters  of  Jerusalem  before  spoken  of,  and 
the  Presbyters  of  Ephesus,  were  truly  Bishops  gathered 
from  the  neighbouring  churches.  This  view  is  rendered 
not  unlikely  by  the  passage  of  Irenseus  already  quoted, 
in  which  he  says  "the  Bishops  and  Presbyters  from 
Ephesus,  and  the  other  neighbouring  cities,  were  con- 
vened" by  St.  Paul. 

It  may  also  be  supposed  that,  among  them,  there 
might  be  Bishops  ;  or  it  may  be  conceived  that  St.  Paul 
calls  them  Bishops,  because  in  his  absence  they  had  the 
oversight  of  the  flock  which  he  had  gathered.  They 
were  his  representatives. 

We  may  now  examine  how  they  meet  the  difficulty 
who,  while  they  contend  for  the  distinction  of  orders,  ad- 
mit the  community  of  names  ;  and  first  we  may  cite  St. 
Chrysostom,  who  on  the  salutation  of  the  Philippian 
Church^  has  this  comment: — "What  is  this?  Were 
there  many  Bishops  of  one  city  ?  By  no  means.  But  he 
thus  calls  the  Presbyters.  For  up  to  that  time  they  par- 
took of  the  names  in  common,  and  the  Bishop  himself 
was  called  a  Deacon."^  Again  :  "  Of  old  the  Presbyters 
were  called  '  Bishops,'  and  the  Bishops  '  Presbyters'  and 
'  Deacons'  of  Christ ;  whence  many  Bishops  even  now 
write  to  their  'fellow-presbyter'  and  'fellow-deacon.' 
But  afterwards  the  proper  name  was  distributed  to  each, 

1)  Philip,  i.  1.  2)  S.  Chrysost.  in  loc. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  IH 

and  the  one  called  '  Bishop,'  the  other  '  Presbyter.' " 
And  on  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy  he  says,  "  Discours- 
ing of  Bishops,  and  sketching  their  character,  and  saying 
what  things  a  Bishop  should  have,  and  from  what  he 
should  abstain,  and  having  dismissed  the  order  of  Pres- 
byters, he  (St.  Paul)  passes  on  at  a  leap  to  the  Deacons. 
Why  ?  Because  the  difference  between  them  and  Bishops 
is  not  much,  forasmuch  as  they  also  are  possessed  of  the 
authority  to  teach,  and  to  rule  the  Church.  And  what  he 
said  of  Bishops  applies  also  to  them ;  for  they  exceed 
them  by  the  power  of  ordaining  only,  and  in  this  alone 
they  have  more  authority  than  the  Presbyters."^ 

Theodoret,  whose  commentary  represents  that  of  St. 
Chrysostom,  says  on  the  same  passage  to  the  Philip- 
pians :  "  He  called  the  blessed  Epaphroditus  their  '  Apos- 
tle' in  this  same  epistle,  thereby  plainly  showing  that  he 
had  the  functions  of  the  Episcopate  committed  to  him  as 
he  had  the  title  of  Apostle."  So  in  verse  25  of  chapter 
ii. :  "  He  called  him  their  Apostle,  as  having  the  charge 
of  them  committed  to  him ;  so  that  it  is  evident  that  they, 
who  in  the  opening  of  the  Epistle  were  called  Bishops, 
ministered  under  him,  that  is,  discharging  the  office  of 
Presbyter,"  And  this  he  explains  more  fully  in  his  com- 
mentary on  1  Tim.  iii. :  "  They  were  wont  of  old  to  call 
the  same  persons  Presbyters  and  Bishops.  But  those 
that  are  now  called  Bishops  they  named  Apostles.  But 
in  process  of  time  they  gave  up  the  name  of  the  Apostle- 
ship  to  those  that  were  in  a  strict  sense  Apostles ;  and 
applied  the  title  of  the  Episcopate  to  those  that  were  of 
old  called  Apostles.  Thus  Epaphroditus  was  Apostle  of 
the  Philippians  ;  thus  Titus  was  Apostle  of  the  Cretans, 
and  Timothy  of  the  Asiatics.  Thus  the  Apostles  and 
Presbyters  who  were  at  Jerusalem  wrote  to  those  in  An- 
tioch."    So  the  author  of  the  Commentary  on  the  Epis- 

1)   In  1  Epist.  ad  Tim.  cap.  iii.  Horn.  xi. 


112         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

ties  of  St.  Paul,  which  has  been  ascribed  to  St.  Jerome/ 
on  the  third  chapter  of  the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  says, 
"  It  is  a  question  why  he  makes  no  mention  of  Presby- 
ters, but  comprehends  them  in  the  name  of  Bishops.  Be- 
cause the  second  order  is  all  but  one,"  i.  e.,  with  the  first. 
Now  it  must  be  remarked  that  both  these  writers,  at  one 
and  the  same  time,  contend  for  the  community  of  the 
names  and  the  distinction  of  the  orders  even  in  the  Apos- 
tles' times  :  so  that,  if  the  view  of  Bishop  Pearson,  found- 
ed on  the  testimony  of  St.  Epiphanius  and  St.  Irenteus, 
be  at  all  unsettled  by  the  weight  of  their  testimony,  our 
conviction  of  the  main  point  for  which  we  are  seeking, 
namely,  the  distinctness  of  the  Episcopate,  must  be  in  the 
same  measure  confirmed. 

We  will,  however,  once  more  take  up  the  passage  in 
the  Book  of  Acts.  The  question  is — Are  the  same  per- 
sons called  by  St.  Paul  both  Presbyters  and  Bishops? 
It  is  evident,  from  all  that  is  gone  before,  that  we  cannot 
arrive  at  any  demonstrative  proof.  We  must  after  all 
rest  contented  with  a  probable  conclusion.  It  seems, 
then,  not  an  untenable  opinion  that  the  same  persons  are 
not  called  by  St.  Paul  "Presbyters"  and  "Bishops." 
The  reasons  of  that  opinion  are  :  first,  that  in  the  whole 
Book  of  Acts  there  is  no  other  passage  which  renders 
such  an  usage  of  words  probable  ;  and,  secondly,  that  the 
use  of  the  words  "  Bishop"  and  "Deacon,"  in  the  Epistle 
to  Timothy,  so  appears  to  square  with  the  state  of  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  under  the  two  orders  of  Apostles 
and  Deacons  as  to  render  the  restricted  and  appropriate 
use  of  the  names  more  probable  than  their  indiscriminate 
application  f  thirdly,  Theophylact,  commenting  on  the 
place,  says,  "  It  is  to  be  observed  that  those  whom  he 
before  calls  Presbj'^ters  he  here  calls  Bishops,  that  is,  be- 

1)  Probably  by  Pelagius.     0pp.  S.  Hieron.  torn.  v.  1089.  ed.  Ben. 

2)  See  page  105,  and  the  note. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  113 

cause  Presbyters  necessarily  oversee  the  reasonable  flock 
of  the  Church,  lest  any  should  be  weak  in  faith,  lest  any 
hung-er  or  thirst,  or  stand  in  need  of  reproof  and  restora- 
tion ;  or  he  thus  calls  Bishops  them  who  were  really 
Bishops.^^^ 

And  this  brings  us  again  upon  the  words  of  St.  Ire- 
nfeus,  which  I  will  now  give  with  the  comment  of  Bishop 
Pearson :  "  Irenseus  did  not  think  that  the  same  men  in 
that  place  were  called  '  Bishops'  and  '  Presbyters,'  or  that 
they  belonged  to  the  church  of  one  ci(y.  For  as  he  says, 
lib.  iii.  c.  14,  '  The  Bishops  and  Presbyters  who  came 
from  Ephesus,  and  the  rest  of  the  neighbouring  cities, 
being  called  together  at  Miletus.'  According  to  the  opin- 
ion of  Irenseus,  St.  Paul  called  to  him  both  Bishops  and 
Presbyters  :  he  did  not  call  them  together  therefore  from 
one  city  alone,  nor  did  he  call  only  the  rulers  of  the 
second  order,  nor  style  them  '  Bishops.'  This  place  in 
the  Book  of  Acts  Chrysostom,  Jerome,  and  others,  in  the 
fourth  and  following  centuries,  quote,  and  lay  as  the  foun- 
dation of  their  opinions,  chiefly  disputing  as  about  one 
city  alone.  Irenseus,  a  writer  of  the  second  century,  and 
much  nigher  to  the  Apostles  and  Apostolic  men,  never  so 
much  as  dreamed  of  such  a  thing. "^  To  this  we  may 
add  that  Irenseus  was  born  probably  at  Smyrna,  and 
about  the  year  a.  d.  97-8,^  that  is,  within  thirty  or  five- 
and-thirty  years  after  the  visit  of  St.  Paul  to  Miletus; 
that  he  was  the  disciple  of  Polycarp,  who  was  Bishop  of 
Smyrna  and  a  companion  of  the  Apostles;  and  that 
Smyrna  was  a  suffragan  church  under  the  metropolitan 
jurisdiction  of  Ephesus.*     All  these  things  are  so  many 

1)  Theophylact,  in  loc. 

2)  Vind.  Ignat.  c.  xiii.  See  also  Bishop  Andrewes'  Concio  ad  Clerum 
on  Acts  XX.  23.  Opuscala,  p.  25.  Tlie  difficulty,  however,  in  Tit.  i.  5—7 
still  remains. 

3)  Cave's  Hislor.  Lit.  in  voc.  Irenasus. 

4)  Bingham,  Oiig.  Eccl.,  book  is.  c.  iii.  ix. 

6* 


I  14  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

probabilities  in  favour  of  St.  Irensens's  thorough  know- 
ledge of  the  then  condition  of  the  Asiatic  churches  ;  and 
therefore  give  his  words  a  weight  that  no  other  uninspired 
Christian  writer  seems  to  possess  on  the  point  in  ques- 
tion. It  would  follow,  then,  that  the  Presbyters  from 
Ephesus  were  the  Presbytery  of  that  church  over  which, 
if  not  already  at  that  time,  at  least  within  a  lime  indefi- 
nitely short,  as  we  shall  see,  Timothy  is  proved  by  Holy 
Scripture  to  be  Bishop.  At  this  convention  he  was  pro- 
bably present.  The  Bishops,  in  this  view,  came  from  the 
neighbouring  cities.  But  be  this  as  it  may.  If  any  one 
still  prefer  the  opinion  of  St.  Chrysostom,  which  has  been 
adopted  by  Hooker  and  Hammond,  it  will  equally  accord 
with  our  niain  argument.  We  will  therefore  dismiss  the 
names,  and  take  up  once  more  the  question,  whether  the 
Apostles  committed  to  many,  or  to  one,  the  power  of 
ruling  and  ordaining  in  the  Church. 

That  the  ultimate  form  in  which  St.  Paul  left  the  poli- 
ty of  the  churches  founded  by  him  was  an  Episcopate  of 
one  person,  is,  I  conceive,  put  beyond  doubt  by  Holy 
Scripture.  The  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus  were 
written  in  the  years  a.  d,  64-66,  that  is,  towards  the  end 
of  his  life,  when  for  that  reason  he  was  providing  for  the 
continuance  of  the  Church  by  succession,  and  thereby  for 
leaving  it  after  his  death  in  the  same  form  in  which  it 
had  been  settled  during  his  life,  when  he  exercised  himself 
the  oversight,  or  Apostolical  Episcopate,  of  all  churches 
of  his  planting;  and  by  these  two  documents  it  is  incon- 
testably  proved  that  Timothy  was  sole  ruler  in  Ephesus, 
and  Titus  in  Crete,  as  the  delegates,  representatives,  and 
successors  of  St.  Paul. 

Now  the  First  Epistle  to  TimotJiy  was  written  either 
when  St.  Paul  passed  into  INIacedonia,  leaving  him  at 
Ephesus,  or  shortly  afterwards ;  and  the  mention  of  this 
event  is  to  remind  Timolh3''of  his  original  appohitment  to 


f 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  1]5 

that  Church.  It  was  written  therefore  either  before  or 
after  the  summoning  of  the  Presbyters  from  Ephesus  to 
Miletus.  Either  way  the  proof  will  hold  that,  a  little  be- 
fore, or  a  Cew  years  after  that  convention,  Timothy  was 
Bishop  over  them,  and  the  supreme  government  of  the 
Church  was  committed  to  him  alone.  In  fact  he  was  to 
them  what  St.  James  was  to  the  Presbyters  at  Jerusa- 
lem ;  and  lest  it  should  seem  that  this  was  a  temporary 
commission,  we  have  the  second  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
written,  on  one  supposition,  two,  on  another,  many  years 
after  the  first,  and  on  any  supposition  at  the  very  end  of 
St.  Paul's  life,  when  he  w^as  "now  ready  to  be  offered, 
and  the  time"  of  his  "  departure  was  at  hand." 

I  forbear  in  the  case  of  Timothy,  as  in  that  of  St. 
James,  to  cite  the  abundant  historical  evidence  which 
proves  that  he  was  in  the  strictest  sense  Bishop  of  Ephe- 
sus. We  are  arguing  from  Holy  Scripture.  It  will  not, 
however,  be  amiss  to  remember  that  the  argument  here 
offered  is  in  exact  accordance  with  the  whole  body  of 
historical  evidence,  and  any  other  in  diametrical  opposi- 
tion to  it. 

We  will  now  examine,  from  the  internal  evidence  of 
the  Epistles,  first,  whence  he  derived  his  commission ; 
and,  next,  -with  what  powers  he  was  invested  over  the 
Ephesian  Presbyters. 

As  to  his  commission,  we  read  it  was  from  St.  Paul 
himself:  "I  besought  thee  to  abide  still  at  Ephesus."^ 
But  the  gift  which  he  received,  that  is,  the  grace  which 
accompanied  the  Episcopate,  was  given  him  by  the  "lay- 
ing on  of  the  hands  of  the  Presbj'-tery."^  Here  we  seem 
to  return  into  the  original  difficulty.  Let  us  first  see 
therefore  how  they  whose  authority  is  used  for  the  com- 
munity of  names  deal  with  this  passage.     St.  Chrysos- 

1)  1  Tim.i.  3.  2)   ITim.  iv.  14. 


IIG         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

tom's  comment  is,  "  He  does  not  here  speak  of  Presby- 
ters, but  of  Bishops,  for  Presbyters  did  not  ordain  a  Bish- 
op." Theophylact  repeats  his  words.  Theodoret  says, 
"He  calls  the  office  of  teaching  a  gift  (/au/o^fct),  and 
those  that  were  deemed  worthy  of  the  apostolic  grace  ihe 
'  presbytery.'  "  Now  it  comes  lo  this — either  they  were 
Bishops,  or  they  were  not.  If  they  were  Bishops  in 
Acts  XX.  28,  they  are  so  here,  and  the  difficulty  vanishes : 
if  not  in  either  place,  we  must  look  for  some  other  solution. 
And  we  need  not  to  look  far.  In  the  first  chapter  of  the 
second  Epistle,  St.  Paul  writes,  "  Stir  up  the  gift  that  is 
in  thee  by  the  putting  on  of  w?/  hands.'"  What  can  then 
be  the  meaning  of  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  ihe  Pres- 
bytery? The  Apostle  declares  himself  to  be  the  sole 
ordainer  of  Timothy.  I  say  sole,  because  he  was  the 
sufficient  authority ;  and  as  for  the  rest,  it  maybe  that 
Silas,  Paul's  fellow- worker,  and  St  Luke,  the  companion 
of  his  journeys,  and  it  may  be  also  gifted  persons,  as  in 
the  mission  of  St.  Paul  himself  to  the  Gentiles,^  were 
joint  partakers  of  the  act.  And  this  last  supposition  has 
a  direct  countenance  from  the  words  of  St.  Paul  to  Tim- 
othy where  he  says,  "  This  charge  I  commit  to  thee,  eon 
Timothy,  according  lo  the  prophecies  which  vent  before 
on  theey^  And,  after  all,  the  Apostle  himself  declaring 
that  his  own  hands  ordained  Timothy,  why  may  we  not 
also  conceive  that  the  Presbytery  of  the  Church  express- 
ed their  acceptance  of  their  spiritual  ruler  by  joining  in 
the  act  V 

1)  2Tim.  i,  6.  2)  Acts  xiii.  1. 

3)  1  Tim.  i.  18.  Comj).  the  prophecy  of  Agabus  on  St.  Paul.  Acts  xxi. 
10,11. 

4)  If,  on  such  n  point  as  this,  a  ronjectnrc  is  not  of  much  weight,  j^ct  it 
can  at  least  do  no  harm  to  cite  ccrtuin  rem;irkat)le  facts  vvliicli  seem  to  look 
towards  the  supposition  in  the  text.  It  is  well  known  that  Presbyters,  who 
have  neither  singly  nor  collectively  the  power  of  ordaining  Presbyters,  are 
nevertheless  permitted  by  the  Catholic  Church  to  express  their  consent  or 
concurrence  in  the  ordimition  of  tlieir  brethren,  by  laying  their  hands,  with 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  117 

We  will  now  go  on  to  the  powers  with  which  Timo- 
thy was  invested.  And  we  may  remark  at  the  outset 
that,  whatsoever  share  the  Presbyters  may  have  had  in 
the  imposition  of  hands,  Timothy  was  intrusted  with  a 
sole  and  supreme  power  over  them. 

First,  he  was  charged  to  witness  the  true  doctrine  of 
Christ;^  and  to  take  heed  that  no  man  should  teach  any 

the  Bishop,  on  the  head  of  the  candidate  for  the  priesthood.  It  is  certain 
that  sucli  a  privilege  has  been  permitted  even  in  the  consecration  of  Bishops. 
We  find  Pope  Pelagius  was  consecrated  by  the  imposition  of  the  hands  of 
two  Bishops  and  one  Presbyter,  a  priest  of  Ostia.  (See  Mason's  Vindica- 
tion of  the  Church  of  England,  &c.  p.  41.)  This  is  on  the  authority  of  Anas  - 
tasius,  and  admitted  by  Baronius  and  Binius.  There  is  also  an  answer  of 
St.  Gregory  the  Great  to  St.  Augustin,  which  is  even  more  in  point.  St. 
Augustin,  in  the  early  part  of  his  mission  in  Britain,  when  he  desired  to 
consecrate  Mellitus  and  Justus,  wrote  to  ask,  "  If  the  Bishops  are  so  far 
apart  one  from  another  that  they  cannot  conveniently  assemble,  whether 
may  a  Bishop  be  ordained  without  the  presence  of  other  Bishops  ?"  Greg- 
ory answered — "  In  the  Church  of  England,  in  which  only  thou  ait  as  yet  a 
Bishop,  thou  canst  not  ordain  at  all  but  in  the  absence  of  other  Bishops. 
For  when  do  any  Bishops  come  out  of  France  to  assist  you  in  ordaining 
Bishops  ?  We  will  therefore  that  you  ordain  Bishops  ;  but  so  that  they  may 
not  be  far  one  from  another,  that  there  be  no  such  necessity  but  that  they 
may  hereafter  come  together  at  the  creation  of  others.  And  the  other  pas- 
tors, whose  presence  is  highly  useful,  may  readily  assemble."  Bede,  Eccl. 
Hist.,  lib.  i.  xxvii.  Here  pastors  evidently  are  distinguished  from  Bishops. 
(See  Mason,  Vind.,  pp.  92,  93.)  We  find  in  IMorinus  de  Prim.  Ord.  Exercit. 
ii.  c.  iii.  vi  ,  the  decree  of  election,  (preserved  in  the  Euchologium,)  which 
was  read  out  at  the  conseciation  of  Bishops.  He  gives  it  as  follows  :  "  If 
the  Patriarch  be  the  conseciator,  the  decree  runs,  'by  the  suffrage  and  ap- 
probation of  the  most  sacred  3Ictropolit;ins,  Archbishops  and  Bishops  ;'  if  a 
Metropolitan  be  consecrator,  thus :  '  by  the  suff'rage  and  approbation  of  the 
Bishops  most  acceptable  to  God,  and  the  reverend  Presbyters'  When  the 
Patriarch  ordains,  that  is,  in  a  patriarchal  province.  Bishops,  Archbishops, 
and  Metropolitans  only  concur  in  the  election ;  but  when  a  Metropolitan, 
the  Presbyters  also."  And  in  this  we  may  find  some  precedent,  such  as  it 
is,  for  the  strange  custom  of  the  Romanists  in  England  and  Ireland,  who, 
"during  the  greater  part  if  not  the  whole  of  the  last  century,"  as  Mr. 
Palmer  says,  "had  Bishops  consecrated  by  one  Bishop  and  two  Priests, 
which  was  done  by  authority  of  a  bull,  permitting,  for  the  "  increase  of 
their  conveniency,"  that,  in  lieu  of  witnesses,  two  secular  priests  should 
assist.  See  Palmer's  Treatise,  vol.  ii.  pj).  4G9,  470. 
J)    1  Tim.  vi.  ]2,  13,  14  ;  2  Tim,  i.  13  ;  iii    14—17 


118  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Other:'  next,  he  was  empowered  to  exercise  discipline 
over  the  flock ;  to  rebuke,  reprove,  and  exhort  ;'^  and,  if 
need  be,  to  reject  from  the  communion  of  the  Church : 
again,  he  was  intrusted  with  authority  to  take  cogni- 
zance of  the  character  and  hvcs  of  Bishops,^  Presby- 
ters* and  Deacons.^  Of  Presbyters  it  is  especially  said, 
"  Let  the  elders  (Presbyters)  that  rule  well  be  counted 
worthy  of  double  honour,  especially  they  who  labour  in 
the  word  and  doctrine.  Against  an  elder  (Presbyter) 
receive  not  an  accusation  but  before  two  or  three  witness- 
es ;"^  and,  lastly,  Timothy  was  empowered  to  continue 
the  succession  of  the  Church  by  the  laying  on  of  liands,'^ 
that  is,  by  ordination.  The  same  office  may  be  shown  fo 
be  vested  also  in  Titus  for  his  Episcopate  over  the  w^hole 
of  Crete.  Only  one  passage,  as  bearing  directly  upon 
the  chief  point  at  issue,  need  be  cited.  "  For  this  cause," 
says  St.  Paul,  "  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest 
set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  Pres- 
byters in  every  city."^  Now  to  this  single  point  of  ordi- 
nation we  may  henceforward  confine  our  inquiry;  and  in 
the  first  place  it  must  be  observed,  that  there  is  no  one 
passage  in  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament  in  which 
Presbyters  are  said  to  lay  on  hands,  except  that  which 
has  been  already  quoted  above  ;  and  there  St.  Paul  de- 
clares that  he  himself  was  the  authority  of  the  ordination 
— I  mean  in  the  case  of  Timothy;  and  in  the  second 
place  it  must  be  observed  that,  in  the  commissions  given 
to  Timothy  and  Titus,  the  power  of  ordination  is  intrust- 
ed to  them  alone.  In  this  one  point  may  be  said  to  lie 
the  differentia  of  the  episcopal  office. 

We  have  already  seen   St.  Chrysostom,  Theodoret, 
and  Theophylact  arguing  that  the  Presbytery  were  Bish- 

])   1  Tim.  i.  3;  vi.  3,  4,  5.  2)    1  Tim.  v.  20  ;  2  Tim.  iv  2. 

3)   1  Tim.  iii.  1.  4)   \  Tim.  v.  17,  19.        5)   1  Tim.  iii.  8,  &c. 

6)  See  above,  p.  88.         7)    1  Tim.  v.  22 ;  2  Tim.  ii.  2.  8)  Titus  i.  5. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  119 

ops,  because  they  laid  hands  on  Timothy  ;  and  St.  Chry- 
sostom  asserting  that  Bishops  exceed  Presbyters  in  the 
power  of  ordaining  only. 

We  will  now  take  the  evidence  of  St.  Jerome,  an  au- 
thority trite  and  acknowledged  by  all  the  impugners  of 
the  Episcopate.  In  his  well-known  epistle  to  Evangelus 
(al.  Evagrius)  he  contends  for  the  community  of  names, 
and  is  supposed  to  contend  for  the  identity  of  orders.  The 
truth  is,  he  wiote  for  the  purpose  of  repressing  the  self- 
elation  of  the  Roman  Deacons,  who,  through  their  riches 
and  influence  in  the  Church,  endeavoured  to  set  them- 
selves before  the  Presbyters.'  He  proves  the  great  in- 
terval of  dignity  between  a  Deacon  and  a  Presbyter  by 
saying  that  a  Presbyter  is  almost  equal  to  a  Bishop. 
This,  one  would  have  thought,  should  have  sufficiently 
expressed  St.  Jerome's  mind,  and  preserved  his  isolated 
words  from  misinterpretation.  After  giving  his  view  of 
the  origin  of  the  episcopal  order,  he  adds,  "  What  does 
a  Bishop  do  that  a  Presbyter  cannot,  except  ordination  ?"^ 

1)  "  Audio  quendam  in  tantam  erupisse  vecordiam,  utDiaconos,  Presby- 
teris,|id  est  Episcopis  anteferret ;"  and  afterwards  :  "  Si  exDiacono  ordina- 
tur  Presbyter,  noverit  se  lucris  minorem,  Sacerdotioesse  majorem." 

2)  It  is  remarkable  that  there  are  not  more  than  two  or  three  instances 
of  apparent  ordination  by  Presbyters  bearing  a  sufficiently  probable  char- 
acter to  be  cited  by  the  adversaries  of  the  sole  episcopal  power.  Bishop 
Stillingfleet,  in  his  Irenicum,  a  book  written  when  he  was  about  four-and- 
twenty  years  old,  after  showing  that  the  power  of  ordination  was  by  the 
laws  of  the  Church  restricted  to  Bishops,  wishes  to  prove  that  nevertheless 
the  ordination  of  Presbyters  was  not  declared  invalid.  From  the  tract  of 
sixteen  hundred  years  he  brings  three  cases,  two  in  the  fourth  and  one  in  the 
fifth  century.     Their  value  will  readily  appear. 

The  first  is  that  of  the  Abbot  Daniel,  a.  d.  390,  who  is  supposed  to  have 
been  made  Deacon  by  Paphnutius,  a  Presbyter  of  the  desert.  This  is  on  the 
authority  of  Cassian,  whose  words  are,  "  So  greatly  did  Paphnutius  delight 
in  his  virtues,  that  he  hastened  to  equal  with  himself  in  the  honour  of  the 
priesthood  a  man  whom  he  knew  to  be  his  peer  in  merit  and  the  grace  of 
life.  For  he  could  by  no  means  endure  that  he  should  tarry  longer  in  a 
lower  ministry  ;  and,  desiring  to  provide  for  himself  a  worthy  successor,  in 
his  own  lifetime,  he  raised  him   by  the  honour  of  the  priesthood."     In  the 


120         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

And  this  is  the  only  point  we  are  now  concerned  with. 
Of  his  other  opinions  we  shall  speak  hereafter. 

first  place,  who  does  not  see  that  the  point  of  the  last  sentence  lies  in  the 
woid  "  superstes," — that  Daniel  was  made  Preshyter  with  a  view  to  the 
succession,  while  Paphnutius  was  yet  alive  ?  In  this  there  was  a  departure 
from  the  usual  course.  Plainly  it  was  not  the  habit  therefore  of  the  supeiioi 
of  the  monastery  to  ordain  his  successor.  But  in  truth  it  is  nowhere  said 
that  Paphnutius  did  ordain  him,  but  "  co-a?quaie"  and  "  provexit"  may  well 
consist  with  the  known  and  notorious  rule  in  the  ordinationof  monks,  name- 
ly, tliat  the  Superior  should  select  and  send  them  to  the  Bishop  in  whose  ju- 
risdiction tlie  monastery  was  situated.  By  the  rule  of  St.  Benedict  it  is 
ordered,  "  If  any  Abbot  should  desire  to  have  a  Presbyter  or  Deacon  ordain- 
ed, let  him  choose  from  the  number  of  his  brethren  one  that  is  meet  to  dis- 
charge the  priestly  office."  Keg,  D.  Bened.  cap.  6.  See  Cassian.  Coll.  4, 
1,  note  6.  As  to  the  monasteries  of  the  East,  they  were  not  exempt  from 
the  Diocesan  Episcopate.  "  Coaequat,"  and  "  provexit"  can  in  no  way  sig- 
nify "ordain."  So  far  as  in  him  lay,  Paphnutius  equalled  Daniel  to  him- 
self, and  preferred  him,  that  is,  chose  him  to  be  made  his  equal,  and  pre- 
ferred to  the  priesthood.  Without  other  evidence,  and  against  the  other- 
wise acknowledged  and  universal  practice  of  the  Church,  and  of  all  monas- 
teries, this  not  only  proves  really  nothing,  hut  is  no  ground  of  probable  rea- 
soning. I  may  add  Fleury's  account  of  the  case  :  "  Daniel  etait  principale- 
ment  recommandable  par  son  humilite.  Paphnuce  le  fit  ordonner  diacre, 
le  preferant  a  plusieurs  autres  plus  ages,  et  meme  ensuite  il  le  fit  elever  au 
earcedoce."     Histoire  Eccl.  lib.  xx.  c.  vii. 

The  second  case  is  the  consecration  of  Pope  Pelagius,  in  which  two 
bishops  and  one  priest  assisted  This  case  is  simply  irrelevant.  The  con- 
secration would  have  been  valid  at  the  hands  of  one  bishop.  The  utmost 
that  can  be  deduced  from  it  is,  that  the  priest  by  imposition  of  hands  ex- 
pressed a  subordinate  concurrence  in  the  act  of  a  superior,  which  was  valid 
without  his  participation.  But  I  have  considered  this  case  already  in  the 
note  to  page  116. 

The  third  and  last  case  is  the  only  one  which  piesents  any  difficulty. 
St.  Leo,  writing  to  Rusticus  Narbonensis,  wlio  had  asked  his  judgment  of 
some  Presbyters  wlio  took  upon  them  to  ord.iin  as  Bishops,  answers — 
"  Those  clergymen  who  were  ordained  by  such  as  took  upon  thom  the  office 
of  Bishops  in  churches  belonging  to  proper  Bishops,  if  the  ordination  were 
performed  by  the  consent  of  the  Bishops,  it  may  be  looked  on  as  valid,  and 
those  Presbyters  remain  in  their  office  in  the  Church."  "  Otherwise 
the  creation  (ordination)  is  to  be  hold  null,  which  has  neither  the  founda- 
tion of  a  place,  (t.  e.  a  cure  or  church,)  nor  is  confirmed  by  authority."  So 
Stillingfleet  words  it.  Now  it  will  l)e  best  to  give  St.  Leo's  answer  entire, 
and  as  it  stands  :  "  No  reason  allows  that  they  should  be  regarded  as 
Bishops  who  are  ncithei  elected  by  tho  clergy,  nor  desired  by  the  people, 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  121 

The  power  of  ordination,  then,  was  first  reserved  in 
the  hands  of  the  Apostles,  and  afterwards  committed,  as 
in  Timothy  and  Titus,  to  Bishops.  St.  Chrysostom  calls 
"  the  power  of  ordination  the  chiefest  of  all,  and  that 

nor  consecrated  by  the  provincial  Bishops,  with  the  approbation  of  the  me- 
tropolitan. Wlierefore,  since  a  question  often  arises  concerning  an  honour 
(t.  e.  ecclesiastical  rank)  which  has  been  irregularly  received,  who  doubts 
that  what  is  not  shown  to  be  conferied  on  them  may  by  no  means  be  attrib- 
uted to  them?  But  if  any  clergy  are  ordained  by  these  mock  Bishops 
(pseudo-episcopi)  in  those  churches  which  belong  to  their  own  Bishops,  and 
their  ordination  is  made  by  the  consent  and  judgment  of  the  Bishops,  (Praes- 
identium,)  it  may  be  held  as  valid,  so  that  they  may  continue  in  the 
churches.  Otherwise  the  ordination  (cretio)  is  null,  being  in  no  place  (i.  e. 
a  cure  or  church)  and  confirmed  by  no  authority."  Now  from  this  it  would 
seem  rather  that  the  "  pseudo-episcopi"  were  not  simple  Presbyters,  but 
men  who  had  obtained  some  irregular  episcopal  consecration.  For  which 
reason  St.  Leo  recites  in  full  the  conditions  of  a  lawful  consecration.  What 
need  had  he  to  say  this  of  a  mere  Presbyter  ?  or  of  any  but  those  who 
claimed  consecration  as  Bishops  ?  There  is  no  mention  of  Presbyter  in  the 
whole  epistle.  Now  it  is  as  plain  as  any  conjecture  can  be  that  these 
pseudo-episcopi  were  Chorepiscopi,  who  weie  consecrated  not  as  the  pro- 
vincial Bishops,  in  the  full  canonical  order  recited  by  St.  Leo,  but  by  one 
Bishop.  This  practice,  vvhich  had  grown  into  the  churches  in  Gaul,  was 
severely  reprehended  by  Damasus,  Leo,  John  IIL  and  Leo  III.  These 
Chorepiscopi  were  consecrated  by  the  Diocesan  Bishops  to  help  them  in 
their  labouis  ;  but  so  that  they  should  not  confirm  or  ordain  without  express 
consent  given  to  that  effect  by  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese.  To  this  Leo 
alludes,  (consensu  et  judicio  Prajsidentium.)  The  Chorepiscopi  by  degrees 
violated  this  restriction  to  such  an  extent  as  to  bring  on  their  entire  suppres- 
sion. And  the  office  of  Presbytei  Chorepiscopus,  or  Archdeacon,  prevailed 
in  theii  stead.  Now,  writing  <f  these  Chorepiscopi,  John  III.  says;  "All 
the  chief  councils  affirm  that  he  is  no  Bishop  who  is  made  Bishop  by  fewer 
than  three  Bishops,  with  the  authority  of  the  Metropolitan  ;  and  therefore 
that  those  whom  you  call  Chorepiscopi,  inasmuch  as  they  are  consecrated 
as  we  hear  by  one  Bishop,  are  no  Bishops,  and  ought  not  to  assume  any 
sacred  function  of  the  pontifical  (episcopal)  privileges."  Morinus  de  Sacr. 
Ord.  ad  Exercit.  iv.  c,  ii.  8,  These  are  exactly  the  pseudo-episcopi  of  St. 
Leo.  Their  consecration  was  real,  by  apostolical  authority,  and  therefore 
their  ordination  was  not  to  be  iterated  ;  but  their  consecration  was  uncanon- 
ical,  and  therefore  every  episcopal  act  was  usurpation  except  "  consensu  et 
judicio  Praesidentium."  They  were  then,  or  by  after-submission  of  the 
party  ordained,  valid,  and  accepted  by  the  Diocesan  Bishop.  That  this  is  St. 
I..eo's  meaning  is  beyond  a  doubt ;  and  his  letter,  having  no  reference  to 
simple  Presbyters,  is  irrelevant  to  the  end  for  which  Stillingfleet  adduced  it. 


122         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

which  above  all  holds  the  Church  together.'"  It  was  for 
this  reason  that  it  was  reserved  to  Timothy  over  Ephesus 
and  the  subject  churches,  and  to  Titus  over  Crete  with  its 
hundred  cities.  What  St.  Cyprian  observes  on  the  com- 
mission given  first  to  St.  Peter  alone  is  true  also  here. 
The  source  and  springhead  of  power  began  from  one  as 
a  type  and  pledge  of  unity.  That  the  preservation  of 
unity  was  the  final  end  of  the  Episcopate,  St.  Jerome 
again  and  again  asserts,  as,  for  instance,  in  his  dialogue 
with  the  Luciferians,  where  he  argues,  "  The  safety  of 
the  Church  hangs  upon  the  dignity  of  the  chief  priest,  to 
whom  if  there  were  not  given  a  power  extraordinary  and 
above  other  men,  there  would  be  made  as  many  schisms 
as  there  are  priests."^  And  he  proceeds  further,  in  the 
above-cited  Epistle  to  Evangelus,  to  give  an  account  of 
the  first  rise  of  the  Episcopate :  "  That  one  was  after- 
wards chosen  out  and  set  over  the  rest  was  done  as  a  cor- 
rective of  schism,  lest  every  man,  drawing  Christ's  Church 
to  himself,  should  rend  it."^  And  in  his  commentary  on 
the  Epistle  to  Titus,  he  says,  "A  Presbyter  is  the  same 
as  a  Bishop,  and  before  that,  by  the  instigation  of  the 
Devil,  factions  were  made  in  religion,  and  it  was  said 
among  the  people,  I  am  of  Paul,  and  I  of  Apollos,  and  I 
of  Cephas,  the  churches  were  governed  by  the  common 
council  of  the  Presbyters.  But  after  that  each  one  re- 
garded those  he  had  baptized,  not  as  Christ's,  but  as  his 
own,  it  was  decreed  in  all  the  world  that  one  chosen  out 
from  among  the  Presbyters  should  be  set  over  the  rest, 
to  whom  should  belong  the  charge  of  the  whole  Church, 
and  thereby  the  seeds  of  schism  be  rooted  out."^     Now 


1)  "  TTnvToyp  jiii'SiiTTa  KVpiMrarov,  Kn'i  6  juWiarTa  avvc^ei  ti)v  Ed-ArXfjiri'ai', 
TO  rdv  ^£io->Toviu>v    '      Vindic.  Ignat.  c,  xiii. 

2)  Morinus  de  Ordinal.  Sacr.  P.  iii.  c.  ii.  3.     See  also  S.  Cypi.  Ep.  55. 

3)  Ad  Evangelum,  torn,  v,  p.  803.  ed.  Ben. 

4)  S.  Hicrom.  in  Tit.  i.  5. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  123 

upon  this  passage  it  must  be  observed  that,  if  taken  to 
deny  the  ApostoHcal  institution  of  the  Episcopate,  it  is 
gratis  dictum  ;  having  no  warrant  of  history  :  it  is  a  the- 
ory inconsistent  with  the  teaching  of  the  three  first  ages 
after  the  Apostles ;  and  with  the  plain  declarations  of 
Holy  Scripture,  which  prove  that  the  sole  power  of  Tim- 
othy and  Titus  was  given  by  the  Apostle  himself. 

In  the  next  place,  it  is  said  that  this  universal  rule  of 
electing  a  single  Presbyter  to  be  Bishop  arose  upon  the 
echisms  of  the  Church.  That  is  to  say,  the  Apostles  acted 
not  by  foresight  and  prevention,  but  by  after-judgment, 
to  correct  an  evil  which  was  both  foreseen  and  foretold. 
How  far  this  is  consonant  with  the  Divine  wisdom,  by 
which  they  were  guided,  any  plain  man  will  readily  de- 
cide ;  and  how  far  it  is  consonant  with  the  evidence  of 
history  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  schisms  of 
which  Jerome  speaks,  at  Corinth,  arose  about  a.  d.  55, 
which  is  the  date  of  St.  Paul's  Epistle,  and  we  already 
find  St.  James  at  Jerusalem,  presiding  over  the  Presby- 
ters of  that  Church,  and,  according  to  Eusebius,  Euodius 
at  Antioch,  who  was  made  Bishop  in  the  year  a.  d.  44.^ 
Now  whether  the  testimony  of  Eusebius  is  intrinsically 
valid  is  no  question.  It  is  at  least  good  against  that  of 
St.  Jerome,  nay  even  better,  as  are  all  detailed  testimo- 
nies against  sweeping  assertions ;  and  certainly  it  is  more 
trustworthy  on  other  grounds,  Eusebius  being  more  than 
half  a  century  earlier,  an  Asiatic  Greek,  and  himself 
bishop  of  a  neighbouring  city. 

The  fact  is  that  this  precedence,  from  what  cause 
soever  it  arose,  existed  before  the  schisms  which  Jerome 
imagined  to  have  produced  it.'^  The  successions  of  the 
churches  of  Jerusalem  and  Antioch  are  older  than  the 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 

1)  By  the  Chronology  of  Syncellus,  a.  d.  40, 

2)  Morinus  de  Ord.  Sacr.  P.  iii.  c.  3.  20. 


124  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

And  lastly,  1  would  observe  that  Jerome  says  "  toto 
orbe  decretum" — it  was  decreed  in  the  whole  world.  In 
his  commenlary  on  Titus,  he  says :  "  As  Presbyters  know 
that  they  are  subject  to  him  that  is  set  over  them  by  the 
custom  of  the  Church,  (ecclesice  consuetudine,)  so  let 
Bishops  know  that  they  are  greater  than  Presbyters, 
rather  by  the  custom  than  by  the  nature  of  the  Lord's 
dispensation."  But  he  immediately  destroys  his  argu- 
ment by  a  parallel  between  Moses  and  the  seventy  Eld- 
ers. Surely  Moses  had  both  supreme  power  and  prece- 
dence "  dispositionis  Dominicse  veritate."  But  Jerome 
says  this  was  an  universal  custom,  and  begun  in  the 
course  of  the  apostolic  ministry,  and,  therefore,  he  must 
mean  by  the  Apostles:  yet  his  words,  '-'decreed  in  the 
whole  world,"  give  it  an  appearance  as  if  it  were  the  act, 
not  of  inspired,  but  uninspired  men.'     If  it  was  so  de- 

1)  In  the  same  Epistle  to  Evangelus,  St.  Jerome  makes  the  following 
statement,  which  has  been  eagerly  used  by  the  gainsayers  of  the  Episcopal 
order : — "  At  Alexandria,  from  the  time  of  Mark  the  Evangelist  to  the  Bish- 
ops Heraclas  and  Dionysius,  the  Presbyters  were  always  wont  to  choose  one 
out  of  their  own  number  and  place  him  in  a  higher  grade,  and  call  him  Bish- 
op, as  the  army  makes  the  Emperor  ;  and  the  Deacons  choose  of  their  own 
number  one  whose  diligence  they  know,  and  call  him  Archdeacon.  For 
what  does  a  Bishop  do  that  a  Presbyter  may  not,  except  ordain  ?  &c." 
From  this  it  has  been  argued  that  by  election,  and  without  consecration,  a 
Presbyter  became  Bishop  of  Alexandria  ;  which  is  contrary  to  the  whole 
current  of  historical  testimony.  Even  Morinus  is  led  to  suppose  this  to  be 
Jerome's  meaning,  because  no  ecclesiastical  ceremony  was  iLted  in  the  conse- 
cration of  emperors  for  some  centuries  after  Jerome's  day.  His  aigument 
•would  then  be  this  :  because  the  emperors  were  not  consecrated  before  the 
practice  of  consecrating  them  was  instituted,  therefore  neither  were  Bish- 
ops, though  the  practice  of  consecrating  them  was  universal  and  from  the 
beginning.  But  in  truth  Morinus  has  missed  St.  Jerome's  meaning.  He 
compares  the  two  elections,  not  the  consequent  ceremonies  All  he  had  to 
show  was  that  Presbyters  border  so  closely  on  the  Episcopate,  that  they  had 
the  right  of  choosing  their  own  bishop.  In  fact  it  is  no  more  tlian  is  pos- 
sessed by  most  churches  of  V^'cstcrn  Europe  at  this  day.  But  his  own  words 
show  this,  for  whence  could  the  elected  Bishop  obtain  the  power  of  ordina- 
tion, which  the  Presbyters  themselves  did  not  possess?  The  truth  is,  he 
had  no  need  to  speak  of  consecration,  and  therefore  wholly  omits  it.     More- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  125 

creed,  let  the  decree  be  produced.  Or  if  it  be  not  forth- 
coming, let  us  rather  Hsten  to  St.  Augustin,  who.  while 
Jerome  was  thus  writing  from  the  east,  taught  another 
and  a  sounder  rule  in  Africa.  "  What  the  whole  Church 
holds,  instituted  by  no  council,  but  always  maintained, 
is  most  rightly  believed  to  flow  from  no  authority  but 
that  of  the  Apostles."^     This  universal  fact  of  an  episco- 

over  it  is  recorded  that  St.  Mark  ordained  Anianus  or  Ananias  to  the  see  of 
Alexandria;  and  that  the  Patriarch  of  that  church  was  consecrated  by  the 
neighbouring  bishops  from  time  immemorial.  See  Hammond,  Diss,  quatuor 
quibus  Episcopatus  Jura,  &cc.  iii.  x.     Works,  vol.  iii.  792. 

1)  Much  stress  is  laid  by  those  who  deny  the  apostolical  institution  of 
orders  upon  the  following  passage  of  TertuUian,  in  which  he  is  supposed  to 
reduce  the  priesthood  of  the  Church  to  a  matter  of  internal  ecclesiastical 
discipline.  "  Are  not  we  laymen  also  priests  ?  It  is  written — '  He  hath 
made  us  a  kingdom,  and  priests  unto  God  and  His  Father.'  The  difference 
between  the  order  (of  Priests)  and  the  people  is  constituted  by  the  authority 
of  the  Church  ;  and  the  dignity  which  is  in  the  consistory  of  the  priesthood 
is  sanctified  ;  insomuch  that  where  the  consistory  and  the  ecclesiastical  or- 
der is  not  found,  thou  makest  oblation,  and  baptizest,  and  art  a  priest  unto 
thyself  alone.  But  where  three  axe,  although  they  be  laymen,  there  is  the 
Church."     De  Exhort,  castitatis,  c.  vii. 

Now  a  slight  regard  to  the  context  will  clear  this  difficulty.  In  recom- 
mending chastity  he  falls  on  the  subject  of  second  marriages.  He  says  they 
are  forbidden  to  the  priesthood.  He  supposes  an  objector  to  say,  "  There- 
fore it  is  lawful  to  others  whom  he  excepts.  Sed  dices,  ergo  caeteris  licet, 
quos  excipit,"  i.  e.,  the  laity.  He  answers,  "  We  are  foolish  if  we  fancy 
that  what  is  not  lawful  for  priests  is  lawful  for  laymen.  Are  not  we  laymen 
also  priests  ?"  tc. 

First,  then,  it  is  plain  that  TertuUian  means  to  refute  the  idea  that  in 
the  nature  of  morals  there  are  two  rules,  one  for  priests,  another  for  laymen. 
He  contends  that  all  moral  beings,  before  God,  are  alike. 

Next  he  teaches  that  the  standing  priesthood  is  an  expression,  or  embody- 
ing, of  the  spiritual  actions  of  the  whole  body. 

And  lastly,  by  "  Ecclesise  auctoritas,"  he  clearly  means  to  include  the 
apostolic  as  much  as  Jerome  does  in  the  "  Ecclesiae  consuetude,"  and  "  toto 
Gibe  decretum." 

All  that  TertuUian  is  concerned  to  show  is,  that  the  difference  between 
the  laity  and  priesthood  has  a  positive  and  not  a  moral  origin — that  it  is  not  a 
differentia  per  se,  but  a  differentia  ex  constituto. 

For  the  last  words  "  Where  three  are,  &c.,"  see  St.  Cyprian  de  Uni- 
tate  "  Dominus  enim  cum  discipulis  suis  unitatem  suaderet,  &c."  p.  198, 


126         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

pal  regimen  can  be  explained  by  no  cause  short  of  an 
universal  agency,  which  was  harmonious  and  alike  in 
every  place.  We  know  oi'  none  such  since  the  mission 
of  the  Apostles.  They  that  gainsay  must  account  for  it.  ^ 
We  may  now  sum  up  the  evidence  of  Scripture  on 
this  point.  It  is  plain  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself 
ordained  his  Apostles,  and  that  the  Apostles  ordained 
Deacons  to  be  their  first  assistanis ;  that  in  a  few  years, 
without  any  mention  of  their  institution,  a  body  of  Pres- 
byters is  found  in  the  Church,  subject  to  the  Apostles, 
sometimes  to  one  Apostle ;  that  to  these  Presbyters  the 
sole  power  of  ordaining,  and  ruling  the  Church,  was 
,never  given ;  that  to  Timothy  and  Titus  both  of  these 
functions  were  committed  severally  and  in  full ;  that  we 
once  read  of  Presbyters  joining  subordinately  with  St. 

ed.  Ben.  He  means  that  the  Church  resides  even  in  its  ultimate  integral 
parts,  however  small. 

And  last  of  all,  it  must  be  remembered  that  Tertullian's  book  de  Exhort, 
castitatis  was  written  after  he  had  turned  Montanist,  and  committed  schism. 
See  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  TertuUian,  p.  62. 

1)  For  those  who  have  an  impression  that  the  Apostles  did  not  institute 
the  government  by  Bishops,  but  that  uninspired  men  after  the  Apostles' 
times  introduced  it,  the  following  passage  from  Chillingworth  fairly  puts  an 
argument  which  I  have  never  seen  as  fairly  met.  "  When  I  shall  see,  there- 
fore, all  the  Fables  of  the  Metamorphosis  acted,  and  prove  true  stories  j  when 
I  shall  see  all  the  democracies  and  aristocracies  in  the  world  lie  down  and 
sleep  and  awake  into  rnonarchies ;  then  will  I  begin  to  believe  that  Prcsby- 
terial  government,  having  continued  in  the  Church  during  the  Apostles' 
time,  should  presently  after  (against  the  Apostles'  doctrine,  and  the  will  of 
Christ)  be  whirled  about  like  a  scene  in  a  mask,  and  transformed  into  Epis- 
copacy. In  the  meantime,  while  those  things  remain  thus  incredible,  and, 
in  human  reason,  impossible,  I  hope  I  shall  have  leave  to  conclude  thus  : 

"  Episcopal  government  is  acknowledged  to  have  been  universally  re- 
ceived in  the  Church  presently  after  the  Apostles'  times. 

"  Between  the  Apostles'  times  and  this  '  presently  after'  there  was  not 
time  enough  for  any  possibility  of  so  great  an  alteration. 

"  And  therefore  there  was  no  such  alteration  as  is  pretended  ;  and  there- 
fore Episcopacy,  being  confessed  to  be  so  ancient  and  Catholic,  must  be 
granted  also  to  be  Apostolic.  Quod  erat  demonstrandum."  The  Apostoli- 
cal Instit.  of  Episcopacy,  Works,  490.  ii. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  127 

Paul  in  an  act  of  ordination ;  that  we  nowhere  read  of 
their  taking  any  such  act  as  a  body  without  an  Apostle ; 
and,  lastly,  that  we  find,  in  two  or  three  passages,  the 
name  "  Bishop"  apparently  given  to  them. 

From  all  these  premises  we  may  conclude,  first,  that 
so  long  as  the  power  of  ruling  and  ordaining  was  re- 
strained in  the  hands  of  the  Apostles,  they  may  have 
acted  as  Curators  of  the  several  Churches  by  a  sort  of 
vicarious  Episcopate — an  office  still  assigned  to  Cathedral 
Presbyteries  in  the  Catholic  Church  during  the  vacancy 
of  any  see.  If  I  may  so  say,  the  Episcopate  in  its  lower 
functions,  for  we  nowhere  read  of  their  ordaining,  was 
put  into  commission :  they  were  none  of  them  severally 
Bishops,  as  Timothy  and  Titus,  but  all  together  exercised 
such  functions  of  the  Episcopate  as  they  were  severally 
capable  of  They  may  have  therefore  partaken  of  the 
name,  as,  "  sede  nondum  constituta,"  they  did  of  the  au- 
thority. 

Secondly,  we  may  conclude  that  the  power  of  ordain- 
ing and  of  ruling  the  Church  was  nowhere  committed  to 
more  than  one  alone.  The  Apostles,  as  they  possessed 
the  fullness  of  their  divine  commission  in  themselves,  so 
they  gave  out  portions  of  it,  according  to  the  needs  of 
the  Church  ;  and  the  rest  they  retained  in  their  own  hands, 
until  they  made  provision  for  their  departure  from  the 
Church  on  earth  by  bequeathing  the  whole  Apostolic 
authority  to  their  successors.  Therefore  we  find,  first, 
an  order  of  assistants  with  powers  very  limited  :  namely, 
the  Deacons. 

And  next  in  order,  with  powers  much  enlarged,  tak- 
ing precedence  of  the  Deacons,  joining  in  the  councils  of 
the  Church,  and  all  but  equal  to  the  Apostles,  to  whom, 
however,  they  are  always  found  in  a  carefully  expressed 
subordination,  we  find  a  body  of  Presbyters. 

The  Presbyters,  therefore,  were  the  material  or  basis 


128  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

of  the  future  Episcopate.  Bishops  were  not  needed  so 
long  as  the  Apostles  themselves  kept  the  oversight  of  all 
Churches;^  and,  therefore,  in  the  early  history  of  the 
Church,  as  contained  in  the  Book  of  Acts,  we  have  no 
record  of  the  act  of  instituting  a  bishopric.  As  the 
time  drew  on  for  the  departure  of  the  Apostles,  they 
were  constituted,  as  at  Jerusalem ;  and  therefore  it 
is  to  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus,  St.  Paul's 
latest  writings,  that  we  must  look  for  the  form  to  which 
the  Churches  of  his  planting  had  grown  up  under  his 
hand.  He  had  reared  the  temple  to  the  coping-stone, 
and  then,  as  the  last  act,  he  fixed  the  pinnacle.  He  was 
to  depart  from  them,  and  he  left  Timothy  and  Titus  as 
his  representatives.  And  this  brings  me  to  the  last  point 
I  shall  touch  upon.  In  thus  committing  the  plentitude  of 
their  authority  to  one,  and  only  one  in  each  Church,  it  is 
evident  that  the  Apostles  acted  upon  the  rule  which  our 
Lord  himself  had  sanctioned  by  His  own  practice.  As  a 
type  of  unity.  He  first  committed  the  Apostolic  power  to 
St.  Peter,''  but  afterwards  to  all  the  Apostles.     They  all 

1)  Morinus  de  Sacris  Ordin.  P.  iii.  c.  iii.  15. 

2)  It  is  as  certain  that  the  precedence  of  the  Church  of  Rome  has  no 
divine  or  apostolical  warrant,  as  that  St.  Peter  had  a  precedence  among  the 
Apostles  by  the  implied  disposition  of  our  Lord,  No  one  who  has  examined 
Holy  Scripture  and  the  Fathers  of  the  Church  can  doubt  of  this  ;  but  the 
real  question  is  not  whether  or  no  he  had  a  precedence,  which  all  well 
instructed  divines  admit,  but  in  what  that  precedence  consisted.  What- 
soever that  precedence  was,  it  was  a  precedence  among  those  who  had 

received  equal  power  with  himself.  The  same  testimonies  which  ascribe 
to  him  a  precedence,  assert  everywhere  with  greater  strength  and  point  the 
equality  of  all  the  Apostles. 

It  is  evident  from  Holy  Scripture  that  the  precedence  of  St.  Peter  was  a 
priority  in  point  of  time.  He  first  confessed  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God, 
and  he  first  received  the  promise  of  the  apostolic  power.  St.  Matth.  xvi. 
16—19.  But  they  all  received  it  afterwards.  St.  John  xx.  21,  22,  23.  He 
first  opened  the  apostolic  commission  at  the  appointment  of  Matthias,  and  at 
the  day  of  Pentecost  opened  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  to  the  Jews,  and  at  the 
conversion  of  Cornelius  to  the  Gentiles.  To  him  was  committed  "  the  gos- 
pel of  the  circumcision,"  Gal.  ii.  7  }  i.  e.  the  office  and  ministry  of  tendering 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  129 

were  what  Peter  was ;  endowed  with  an  equal  share  in 
the  fellowship  of  an  equal  authority.     Not  that  they  were 

the  Gospel  to  the  Jews.  Throughout  Judaea  and  Asia  and  in  every  place 
this  was  first  done,  and  a  foundation  of  Jewish  converts  laid,  on  which  the 
Gentile  converts  were  afterwards  built.  Thus  the  ministry  of  St.  Peter 
came  first,  that  of  St.  Paul  came  afterwards,  and  we  find  in  the  Book  of 
Acts  that  the  preaching  of  St.  Peter  is  recorded  down  to  the  conversion  of 
Cornelius.  Then  follows  the  preaching  of  St.  Paul.  The  whole  Church, 
therefore,  is  built  on  the  Gospel  of  the  Circumcision,  the  ministry  of  St. 
Peter,  and  so  on  St.  Peter  himself.  The  interpretation  of  the  words  of 
Christ  in  Matth.  xvi.  18,  was  very  various  in  the  Catholic  Church.  St. 
Augustin  interpreted  the  Rock  either  of  Peter  or  of  Christ,  and  invites  the 
reader  to  make  his  choice.  He  says  the  former  interpretation  was  in  the 
mouths  of  many,  being  in  a  song  of  Ambrose.  But  he  inclines  himself  to  the 
latter  ;  and  that  in  his  Retractions,  lib.  i.  c.  xxi.  To  this  it  should  be  added 
that  thirty-six  Fathers  and  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  all  ages  and  nations  in 
the  East  and  the  West,  including  ten  Popes,  interpret  the  Rock  to  be  the 
true  Faith.     Palmer's  Treatise,  vol.  ii.  p.  484. 

Now  as  to  the  sense  of  the  Fathers.  St.  Peter  is  often  spoken  of  as  chief, 
and  leader,  and  CoryphaBus,  &c.,  of  the  Apostles  (rou  %Oj3ou  rujv  '  A-iroard- 
Xmv  Kopvipaioi,  ^A.TroaT6\o}v  Kopv(pai6raTog,  TTpofiyopos,  dp)(^r]ydi,  irpdeSpoSy 
E^apxoi,  np'xniraTris.  &c.,  and  by  the  Latins  aa  Princeps,  Primus,  &c.  (See 
Nectarius  confut  Imper.  Papae,  p.  119— 225.)  The  same  titles  are  given  to  the 
other  Apostles.  Chrysostom  calls  Andrew,  James  and  John,  Kopv(pdtos  in  sev- 
eral places.  He  calls  also  James  and  John  "  two  Coryphaeuses."  Horn,  xxxii. 
in  St.  Matth.  Nectarius  defines  "  Coryphaeus"  to  be  "  primus  ordine  inter 
eos  qui  sunt  ejusdem  ordinis."  But  the  same  writers  testify  also  that  all 
the  Apostles  were  of  equal  power.  St,  Cyprian  we  have  already  seen  say- 
ing—" the  other  Apostles  were  what  Peter  was,  endowed  with  an  equal 
plenitude  both  of  honour  and  power."  (De  Unit.  Eccl.)  St.  Ambrose  : 
"  When  Peter  heard  '  But  whom  say  ye  that  I  am  .^'  immediately  remem- 
bering his  place,  he  takes  the  precedence — the  precedence  indeed  in  confes- 
sion, not  in  honour— the  precedence  in  faith,  not  in  order."  "  Hear  him 
saying,  '  I  will  give  thee  the  keys  ;'  what  is  said  to  Peter  is  said  to  the  other 
Apostles."  Chrysostom  says — "  All  in  common  were  intrusted  with  the 
care  of  the  whole  world."  Cyril  of  Alexandria  says — "  Peter  and  John 
were  equal  in  honour  to  each  other."  Victor  of  Carthage  :  "  To  the  Church 
all  the  blessed  Apostles,  endued  with  an  equal  fellowship  of  honour  and 
power,  brought  multitudes  of  people."  The  fifth  CEcumenical  Synod  de- 
clares that  "  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  abounded  in  each  of  the  Apostles, 
80  that  they  needed  not  the  counsel  of  any  other  in  the  things  that  should 
be  done."  Oiigen,  Cyprian,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Etherius,  and  others,  inter- 
pret "  the  Rock"  of  the  Apostles  generally,  (see  Ephes.  ii.  20 ;  Rev.  xxi.  14  . 
These  passages  are  given  by  Mr.  Palmer,  vol.  ii.  pp.  480-484  j  and  every  one 


130        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

dependent  one  on  another,  so  as  to  be  unable  to  act  ex- 
cept in  an  united  college.  Each  severally  was  absolute. 
Under  God,  he  had  no  one  set  over  him.  Each  one  was 
a  vicar  and  vicegerent  of  Christ.  Each  one,  in  every 
land  wheresoever  they  were  scattered  abroad,  carried 
with  him  the  whole  mystery  of  the  Gospel ;  all  its  truths, 
and  sacraments,  and  powers.  As  each  one  had  in  him- 
self the  faith,  so  he  had  the  polity  of  the  Church  in  all 
its  plenitude  ;  and  as  Christ  their  Lord  had  intrusted  His 
own  commission  in  full  to  each  one  of  their  body,  so  did 
they  in  like  manner.  They  had  represented  Him,  and 
now  they  constituted  representatives  of  Him  and  of  them- 
selves. They  therefore  made  over,  in  like  manner,  their 
commission  in  full  to  chosen  men,  who  in  their  stead 
should  be  to  each  several  Church  the  Vicars  of  Christ 
and  of  God ;  and  on  this  is  founded  the  rule  which  is  as 
old  as  the  Apostolic  age.  "  Wheresoever  the  Bishop 
appears,  there  let  the  multitude  be,  even  as  wheresoever 
is  Christ  Jesus,  there  is  the  Catholic  Church.'"  "  There 
is  one  God  and  one  Christ  the  Lord,  one  Holy  Ghost,  and 
so  ought  there  to  be  one  Bishop  in  a  Catholic  Church.'"^ 
This,  then,  is  the  ultimate  form  of  organic  unity.     "The 

familiar  with  the  Fathers  will  know  that  they  may  be  multiplied  to  a  great 
extent.  But  this  is  enough  to  show  that  the  precedence  of  St.  Peter  in  no 
way  affected  the  absolute,  independent  equality  of  power  in  each  several 
Apostle ;  and  so,  if  it  were  true,  as  it  cannot  be  shown,  that  any  Christian 
Bishop  had  succeeded  to.  his  precedence,  it  could  in  like  manner  no  way 
affect  the  absolute,  independent  equality  of  each  Catholic  Bishop.  As  St. 
Paul  withstood  St.  Peter  at  Antioch,  so  might  any  Bisliop  withstand  the 
successor  of  his  precedence.  I  have  thought  it  best  to  throw  these  few- 
remarks  into  a  note,  because  the  present  is  not  the  occasion  for  entering  into 
a  subject  of  this  extent  5  and  because,  having  in  the  text  referred  to  the 
precedence  of  St.  Peter,  and  also  the  precedence  of  the  Roman  Patriarch, 
(see  page  85,)  between  which  no  connexion  by  divine  or  apostolical  appoint- 
ment can  be  shown,  it  is  not  necessary  to  introduce  these  observations  into 
the  context  of  the  book.  The  precedence  of  Rome  has  another  origin,  and 
that  has  been  already  noticed.  On  this  point  see  Thorndike's  Epilogue, 
Book  iii.  c.  6,  xviii. 

1)  S.  Ignat.  ad  Smyrn.  2)  S.  Cypr.  Ep.  xlvi. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  131 

Church  departs  not  from  Christ,  and  they  are  the  Church 
(who  are)  a  people  united  to  the  Priest — a  flock  cleaving 
to  its  pastor ;  for  the  Bishop  is  in  the  Church,  and  the 
Church  in  the  Bishop."^  So,  in  every  several  Church, 
the  successor  and  representative  of  the  Apostles  is  the 
visible  centre,  type,  source,  and  bond  of  unity.  He,  with 
his  Presbytery  and  assistant  Deacons,  is  an  image  and 
reflex  of  the  whole  Church — an  integral  and  homogene- 
ous part  which  coalesces  with  every  other.  And,  for  col- 
lective unity,  all  the  Bishops  of  the  Catholic  Church  at 
large  are  one  College.  They  are  to  the  Church  of  these 
latter  times  what  the  Apostolic  College  was  to  the  Church 
in  the  beginning — all  equal  in  sacerdotal  power,  but  or- 
dered according  to  ecclesiastical  use  and  custom.  In  and 
under  them  the  Church  Catholic  is  one.  There  is,  then,  a 
collective  unity  of  all  particular  Churches,  with  their 
several  Bishops,  in  one  Catholic  body  under  the  Episco- 
pal College  ;  and  there  is  a  distributed  or  several  unity 
in  each  particular  Church,  under  its  own  Bishop.  This 
unity  of  the  Church,  therefore,  inheres  in  the  one  origin, 
the  one  succession,  and  the  one  College  of  Catholic 
Bishops  ;  and  here  we  may  leave  the  subject  of  organic 
unity. 

We  now  come  to  the  second  division  of  this  subject ; 
namely,  the  Moral  Unity  of  the  Church.  By  this  ex- 
pression I  would  be  understood  to  mean  what  is  often 
called  the  Unity  of  Communion.  The  basis  of  this  unity 
is  the  subjective  state  of  the  moral  character,  and  the 
union  of  Christian  men  in  the  habits  of  faith,  hope,  and 
charity  ;  or,  as  St.  Cyprian  expresses  it,  "  Charity,  which 
is  greater  than  hope  and  faith,  is  the  bond  of  brotherhood, 
the  foundation  of  peace,  the  hold  and  strength  of  unity."^ 
And  St.  Augustin,  in  like  manner,  says,  "  It  is  manifest 
that  Sion  is  the  City  of  God:  what  is  that  City  of  God 

1)   S.  Cypr.  Ep.  Ixix.  2)  De  Bono  Patientiae,  p.  251,  ed.  Ben. 


132        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

but  the  holy  Church  ?  For  men  who  love  each  other,  and 
also  their  God,  who  dwells  in  them,  are  unto  God  a  city. 
As  a  city  is  held  together  by  some  law,  their  law  is  love; 
and  love  is  God.'" 

This  moral  unity  is  evidently  a  law,  not  only  of  the 
Church  and  of  Revelation,  but  of  nature  and  of  the  con- 
stitution of  mankind.  The  moral  unity  of  a  family  is  the 
aboriginal  type,  and  the  national  unity  of  a  people  a 
partial  antitype  of  ihe  same  mystery,  which  has  its  per- 
fect fulfilment  in  the  Catholic  Church  alone.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  to  recite  the  types  and  prophecies,  or  the  para- 
bles and  the  prayer  of  our  Lord,  in  which  this  oneness  of 
fellowship  in  love  and  good  will  among  all  the  members  of 
His  body  is  expressed.  It  will  be  enough  to  refer  to  two 
passages  only  as  samples  of  many  which  will  immediately 
be  remembered.  For  instance,  the  words  of  our  Lord  in 
St.  Mark  x.  29,  30,  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  there  is  no 
man  that  hath  left  home,  or  brethren,  or  sisters,  or  father, 
or  mother,  or  wife,  or  children,  or  lands,  for  my  sake  and 
the  Gospel's,  but  he  shall  receive  an  hundredfold,  now  in 
this  time,  houses,  and  brethren,  and  sisters,  and  mothers, 

and  children,  and  lands ; and  in   the   world  to 

come,  eternal  life."  And  in  St.  John  xvii.  11 — 21,  "  Holy 
Father,  keep,  through  thine  own  Name,  those  whom  thou 
hast  given  me,  that  they  may  be  one,  as  we  are ;"  and, 
"  ihat  they  all  may  be  one,  as  thou,  Father,  art  in  me, 
and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us,  that  the 
world  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me."  One  or  two 
passages  from  uninspired  writers  may  be  subjoined  to 
show  in  what  they  understood  this  moral  unity  of  the 
Church  to  consist.  St.  Cyprian,  in  his  treatise  on  that 
.subject,  writes,  "The  Lord  says,  '  I  and  the  Father  are 
one.'  And  again,  concerning  the  Father,  the  Son,  and 
the  Holy  Ghost,  it  is  written,  '  These  three  are  one.' 

1)   Enarratio  in  Psalm  xcviii. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         133 

And  does  any  think  that  this  unity,  which  springs  from 
the  steadfastness  of  the  Godhead,  cleaves  together  with 
heavenly  sacraments,  can  be  rent  asunder  in  the  Church, 

and  separated  by  the  divorce  of  clashing  wills  ? 

This  house  and  resting-place  of  unanimity  the  Holy 
Ghost  designs  and  declares  in  the  Psalms,  saying,  '  God 
also  makes  men  to  be  of  one  mind  in  one  house.'  In  the 
house  of  God,  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  they  who  are  of 
one  mind  dwell,  and  they  who  are  of  one  and  a  single 
heart  persevere."^  St.  Augustin,  speaking  of  the  Church, 
says,  "  The  peace  of  a  family  is  the  well-ordered  con- 
cord of  rule  and  obedience  in  them  that  dwell  together  : 
the  peace  of  a  city  the  well-ordered  concord  of  rule  and 
obedience  in  the  citizens.  The  peace  of  the  Heavenly 
City  is  the  fellowship  of  perfect  order  and  concord  in  the 
enjoyment  of  God,  and  of  each  other  in  God."^ 

But  in  a  matter  so  fully  known  and  acknowledged  on 
all  hands,  it  is  not  needful  to  do  more  than  sketch  in  out- 
line the  nature  of  this  moral  unity. 

It  consists,  then,  of  two  great  elements :  subordina- 
tion and  charity — i.  e.,  subordination  of  Christians  to  their 
lawful  pastors,  and  charity  towards  their  brethren  in 
Christ  These  two  moral  elements  make  up  the  internal 
unity  of  Churches.  '-They  continued  steadfastly  in  the 
Apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  and  in  breaking  of 
bread,  and  in  prayers."  Such  is  the  outline  of  the  prima- 
ry form  of  Christian  unity.  In  the  Apostles'  doctrine  and 
fellowship  we  have  the  faith  and  polity,  the  doctrine  and 
discipline,  as  explained  in  the  foregoing  part  of  this 
chapter :  in  the  breaking  of  bread  and  in  prayers,  the 
moral  unity  of  charity  and  worship,  which  is  tlie  subject 
of  this. 

The  "  plebs  sacerdoti  adunata"  is  the  first  condition ; 
the  reciprocal  union  of  all  members  of  the  flock  is  the 

1)   De  Unit.  Eccl.  pp.  195,  196.  2)  De  Cir.  Dei.  lib.  lii.  la 


134  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

second ;  and  these  make  up  the  moral  unity  of  every  sec- 
tion of  the  Church.  In  the  union  of  pastors  with  each 
other,  and  with  their  Bishop,  consists  the  unity  of  a  dio- 
cesan Church.  In  like  manner,  in  the  union  of  many 
diocesan  Churches  throughout  the  several  ecclesias- 
tical distributions  of  jurisdiction,  and  of  all  Churches 
throughout  the  whole  world,  consists  the  moral  unity  of 
subordination  to  the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  and  of 
charity  with  all  members  in  the  mystical  body  of  Christ. 

Such  being  the  nature  of  this  moral  unity,  we  may 
shortly  state  also  in  what  way  it  is  secured  and  ascer- 
tained. 

The  central  point  of  unity  is  the  communion  of  the 
blessed  Eucharist,  in  which  Christian  men  cherish  as  well 
as  testify  subordination  and  charity  to  their  pastor  and 
his  flock ;  and  though  the  members  of  the  several 
Churches  cannot — because  of  their  primary  duty  to  main- 
tain the  first  conditions  of  unity  with  their  own  pastor, 
and  also  because  of  remoteness  of  place  and  diversity  of 
language — except  in  certain  cases,  hold  their  actual  com- 
munion with  the  members  of  other  Churches,  yet  the 
sacrifice  and  sacrament  of  the  blessed  Eucharist  being 
one  and  the  same  in  all  places,  the  very  act  of  oblation 
and  communion  is  actual  unity  with  all  branches  of  the 
Church. 

The  Eucharist  of  the  whole  Church  Catholic  is  one 
Eucharist.  "We  being  many  are  one  bread."  "In 
which  very  sacrament  is  represented  the  natural  union 
of  our  people :  for  in  like  manner  as  many  grains  gath- 
ered, and  ground,  and  mingled  in  one,  make  one  bread, 
so  in  Christ,  who  is  the  heavenly  Bread,  we  know  there 
is  one  body  to  which  our  multitude  is  joined  and  united."' 
And  thus,  as  by  one  act,  all  Churches,  from  the  rising  to 
the  setting  of  the  sun,  have  communion  with  each  other 
1)  S.  Cypr.  Ep.  63. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  135 

through  one  and  the  same  sacrifice,  in  the  Court  of 
Heaven. 

But,  besides  this  virtual  communion,  all  Churches 
may  testify  their  moral  unity  by  communicatory  letters, 
whether  on  matters  of  public  discipline  or  of  private  inter- 
est. Those  of  public  discipline  are  such  as  communi- 
cate to  other  Bishops  the  consecration  of  any  to  a  vacant 
see  ;  or  again,  the  deposition  and  degradation  of  pastors, 
or  the  excommunication  of  members  of  any  Church:  for 
these  are  matters  of  public  concern,  all  Churches  being 
equally  bound  to  ratify  and  to  act  upon  any  decision  or 
sentence  duly  and  justly  pronounced  by  lawful  authority : 
any  man  excommunicated  in  one  Church  being  excom- 
municated in  all,  and  any  man  absolved  in  one  being 
absolved  in  all. 

The  communicatory  letters  of  a  private  sort  are  those 
that  relate  to  aids  and  alms  sent  to  any  particular  Church 
in  its  emergencies  ;  or  letters,  credential  and  testimonial, 
affirming  the  character  and  quality  of  any  member  of  a 
Church  to  any  or  all  other  Churches  into  the  communion 
of  which  he  may  seek  admission.^ 

Another  mode  of  securing  and  expressing  this  moral 
unity  is  in  the  practice  of  holding  Synods  and  Councils, 
diocesan  or  general,  for  common  deliberation  and  defini- 
tion ;  and  in  the  unanimous  reception  and  execution  of 
canons  and  decrees. 

The  moral  unity  of  the  Church,  therefore,  consists  in 
a  communion  of  all  Churches  in  worship  and  practice, 
in  friendly  intercourse  and  correspondence,  and  in  all 
judicial,  deliberative,  and  executive  acts. 

1)  "  For  this  was,  of  old,  the  glory  of  the  Church,  that,  from  one  end  of 
the  world  to  the  other,  the  brethren  of  each  several  Chuich,  furnished  for 
their  journey  with  a  small  symbol,  found  all  to  be  Fathers  and  Brethren." 
S.  Basil.  Ep.  191. 

So  Tertullian :  "  Probant  unitatem  communicatio  pacis,  et  appellatio 
fraternitatis,  et  contesseratio  hospitalitatis."     De  praesc.  Haer.  xx. 


136 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


At  the  outset  of  this  chapter  we  proposed  to  examine 
in  what  the  unity  of  the  visible  portion  of  the  Church 
consists  ;  and  it  is  now  time  that  we  should  sum  up  the 
result  of  the  inquiry,  and  bring  this  part  of  the  subject 
to  an  end. 

We  have  found  it  to  consist  partly  of  a  definite  form 
of  doctrine  and  discipline  delivered  to  mankind  by  Christ 
and  his  Apostles,  and  partly  of  the  relation  and  order 
subsisting  among  those  who  received  it.  We  have 
called  these  the  organic  and  moral,  or  the  objective  and 
subjective  unity  of  the  Church :  the  organic  or  objective 
unity  being  the  identity  of  the  church  of  any  age  with 
the  church  of  the  Apostles  in  the  faith  and  sacraments, 
and  in  the  commission  received  from  Christ,  and  trans- 
mitted by  lawful  succession :  the  moral  or  subjective 
unity  being  oneness  of  communion  internally  among  the 
several  members  of  each  church,  and  externally  among 
the  several  churches  throughout  the  world. 


CONCLUSION. 


We  have  now  completed  the  first  part  of  the  subject 
before  us.  It  is  of  importance,  however,  that  we  should 
make  some  remarks  upon  the  form,  as  distinguished  from 
the  matter,  of  the  argument  which  has  been  used  in  the 
foregoing  chapters,  before  we  pass  on  to  the  second  part. 

It  was  not  necessary  to  prove  that  there  exists,  among 
Christians,  a  doctrine  of  unity.  The  only  question  to  be 
examined  was  concerning  the  nature  and  limitations  of 
that  doctrine.  It  is  evidently,  therefore,  a  question  not 
of  speculation,  or  of  opinion,  but  of  fact ;  and  as  a  ques- 
tion of  fact  it  is  to  be  decided  by  external  or  historical 
evidence.  The  truth  or  falsehood  of  the  doctrine  in  ques- 
tion is,  if  I  may  so  speak,  accidental  to  the  inquiry.  We 
have  to  ascertain  what  is,  and  has  been  from  the  begin- 
ning, the  belief  of  Christians  respecting  the  unity  of  the 
Church.  Now,  in  seeking  for  an  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion we  are  necessarily  constrained  to  go  to  the  written 
documents  of  the  most  primitive  times.  The  first  and 
most  obvious,  as  being  in  the  hands  and  mouths  of  all 
Christians,  is  the  Catholic  Creed.  We  were  compelled, 
therefore,  to  ascertain  the  antiquity  of  the  article  which 
declares  the  unity  of  the  Church. 

But  as  this  article  is  capable  of  many  apparent  inter- 
pretations, it  was  necessary  to  ascertain  in  what  sense 

"2*- 


138        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

it  was  interpreted  by  the  Church  in  the  beginning.  We 
were,  therefore,  compelled  a  second  time  to  consult  the 
written  documents,  partly  as  interpreters  and  partly  as 
witnesses ;  and  these  documents  we  find  of  two  sorts, 
inspired  and  uninspired.  In  one  sense,  it  is  plainly  im- 
possible to  treat  the  subject  as  a  question  of  simple  history 
from  the  time  that  the  inspired  Scriptures  are  intermin- 
gled with  the  evidence.  They  not  only  attest  the  his- 
torical fact,  but  also  the  truth  of  any  doctrine. 

At  the  same  time  it  must  be  observed,  that  in  this  in- 
quiry I  have  adduced  Holy  Scripture  also  as  historical  ev- 
idence. I  have  not  felt  myself  at  liberty  as  yet  to  use  any 
arguments,  or  any  form  of  argument,  except  that  which 
is  strictly  and  simply  of  an  historical  and  external  sort; 
and  for  this  reason :  There  either  was  or  was  not  a  doc- 
trine of  unity  taught  by  the  Apostles,  If  there  was,  that 
doctrine  must  be  found  in  their  own  writings  and  in  the 
writings  and  teaching  of  their  successors.  The  question 
then  is  one  of  history.  I  have  endeavoured  to  exhibit 
the  doctrine  as  it  is  to  be  found  in  the  primitive  records ; 
but  I  have  carefully  abstained  from  touching  on  the  prob- 
able moral  design,  or  final  end  of  this  dispensation,  and 
also  from  all  explanation  or  reply  to  objections  which 
might  seem  to  lie  against  it  in  its  consequences.  These 
we  shall  consider  hereafter.  At  present  we  have  dealt 
with  the  subject  as  a  question  of  fact;  and  if  I  have 
drawn  the  foregoing  proofs  from  trustworthy  documents, 
and  correctly  gathered  the  sense  of  the  testimonies,  I  do 
not  see  how  any  one  can  refuse  the  conclusion — that  the 
doctrine  of  Catholic  unity  as  here  exhibited  is  derived 
from  the  Apostles  of  Christ.  I  wish  this  to  be  the  more 
carefully  noted,  because,  in  almost  every  case  1  am 
aware  of,  the  objections  of  controversialists,  and  the  dif- 
ficulties of  simpler  minds,  are  to  be  found  either  in  the 
form  of  d  priori  assumptions  as  to  the  nature  of  unity, 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


139 


or  in  the  untenable  consequences  which  are  supposed  to 
follow  from  the  doctrine  above  stated :  as,  for  instance — 
It  is  alleged  that  God  would  not  tie  up  His  redeeming 
grace  to  any  mere  form  ;  or  that,  if  He  has,  then  all  who 
are  without  it  must  be  in  extreme  peril,  if  not  certainly- 
lost.  Of  the  intrinsic  inconclusiveness  of  these  two  forms 
of  objection  we  shall  have  to  speak  in  another  place.  At 
present  it  is  only  necessary  to  remark  that  when  brought 
in  reply  to  positive  evidence  o^  fact,  they  are  simply 
irrelevant.  I  do  not  say  that  objections  may  not  be 
brought  against  the  statements  already  made  in  this 
work ;  but  I  may  say  that  no  objections  will  be  relevant, 
except  such  as  will  show  either  that  the  sense  of  the 
testimonies  adduced  has  been  incorrectly  given,  or  if 
correctly,  that  the  testimonies  are  themselves  without 
weight 


PART   II. 

THE  MORAL  DESIGN  OF  CATHOLIC  UNITY. 


CHAPTER   I. 


THE     MOKA.I,    DESIGN   OF    THE    CHURCH   AS     BUOVTS    BY    HOLT    SCRIP- 
TURE. 

INTRODUCTION. 

In  the  foregoing  part  of  this  work  I  have  brought  for- 
ward the  evidence  to  prove  that  God,  by  a  direct  act  of 
revelation  and  appointment,  has  ordained  one  visible 
body,  compacted  into  one  visible  form  or  polity,  which  is 
His  Church.  Thus  far  we  have  considered  only  the  fact, 
and  not  the  reason — only  the  positive  appointment,  and 
not  the  moral  design  of  God.  As  we  have  therefore 
found  external  evidence  to  convince  us  that  God  has  thus 
ordered  His  Church,  the  next  step  is  for  us  to  inquire 
why  He  has  done  so. 

That  all  the  works  of  God  are  pointed,  by  His  perfect 
wisdom,  at  some  aim,  is  an  axiom  as  inseparable  irom 
the  reason  of  man  as  the  idea  of  God  Himself.  We  need 
therefore  only  to  inquire  what  is  the  aim  or  end  of  the 
Divine  wisdom  in  the  institution  of  His  Church.  In  seek- 
ing an  answer  to  this  question,  it  is  plain  that  we  are  not 
at  liberty  to  form  to  ourselves  d  priori  conceptions  of  His 
design.  We  are  so  greatly  ignorant  of  the  intrinsic  na- 
ture of  the  Divine  Mind,  of  the  extent  of  the  causes  which 


144  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

have  brought  mankind  to  their  present  state,  of  thecondi 
tion  of  man  as  viewed  in  combination  w^ith  the  whole 
scheme  of  God's  universe,  of  the  laws  and  conditions 
which  govern  the  invisible  world,  of  the  nature  of  evil, 
and  death,  and  will,  and  of  all  other  mysteries  and  reali- 
ties which  make  up  the  constitution  of  man,  and  his  rela- 
tion to  God,  that  we  cannot,  without  presumption,  ven- 
ture upon  a  conjecture,  antecedently  to  examining  the 
express  revelation  of  God,  as  to  the  final  cause  and  great 
moral  design  of  the  particular  mode  in  which  He  has 
been  pleased  to  cast  the  economy  of  our  redemption. 
This  is  not  said  as  if  any  of  the  purposes  of  God  could  be 
for  a  moment  opposed  to  the  pure  reason  and  conscience 
of  His  creatures.  Let  reason  and  conscience,  unclouded 
by  the  passions,  and  the  prejudice  of  a  secret  leaning,  be 
fairly  left  to  work,  and  they  will  be  found  to  issue  in  a 
perfect  harmony  with  the  Mind  from  which  they  have 
their  being.  But  there  is  no  part  of  theology  in  which 
men  are  guilty  of  more  unfairness  than  in  the  investiga- 
tion of  final  causes.  Minds  at  other  times  the  most  equi- 
table are,  in  such  examinations,  found  to  be  warped  and 
biassed.  Some  early  prejudice,  some  collateral  effect, 
some  foreseen  consequence  from  this  or  that  particular 
opinion,  or  some  contrariety  to  the  preference  of  their 
own  minds,  will  make  them  either  wholly  reject  or  even 
refuse  to  examine  into  the  plainest  appointment  of  God. 
"  It  is  indeed  a  matter  of  great  patience  to  reasonable 
men  to  find  people  arguing  in  this  manner:  objecting 
against  the  credibility  of  such  particular  things  revealed 
in  Scripture  that  they  do  not  see  the  necessity  or  expe- 
diency of  them.  For  though  it  is  highly  right,  and  the 
most  pious  exercise  of  our  understanding,  to  inquire,  with 
due  reverence,  into  the  ends  and  reasons  of  God's  dispen- 
sations, yet,  when  these  reasons  are  concealed,  to  argue 
from  our  ignorance,  that  such  dispensations  cannot  be 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  145 

from  God,  is  infinitely  absurd.  The  presumption  of  this 
kind  of  objections  seems  almost  lost  in  the  folly  of  them  ; 
and  the  folly  of  them  is  yet  greater  when  they  are  urged, 
as  usually  they  are,  against  things  in  Christianity,  analo- 
gous or  like  to  those  natural  dispensations  of  Providence 
which  are  matter  of  experience.  Let  reason  be  kept  to, 
and  if  any  part  of  the  Scripture  account  of  the  redemption 
of  the  world  by  Christ  can  be  shown  to  be  really  contrary 
to  it,  let  the  Scripture,  in  the  name  of  God,  be  given  up  ; 
but  let  not  such  poor  creatures  as  we  go  on  objecting 
against  an  infinite  scheme  that  we  do  not  see  the  neces- 
sity or  usefulness  of  all  its  parts,  and  call  this  reasoning."^ 

In  seeking,  then,  for  the  great  moral  purposes  of  God 
in  the  institution  of  His  visible  Church,  we  shall  run  the 
least  risk  of  falling  into  the  danger  of  private  specula- 
tions if  we  keep  ourselves  exclusively  to  what  God  has 
Himself  taught  us  of  His  own  designs.  We  shall  there- 
fore take  the  grounds  of  our  reasoning,  in  this  chapter, 
from  Holy  Scripture  alone. 

1.  And  first,  it  is,  on  all  hands,  confessed  that  the  final 
and  highest  end  in  which  all  the  works  and  ways  of  God 
conspire  and  rest  is  His  own  glory.  This  we  may  learn 
of  the  heavenly  hosts,  whom  the  beloved  disciple  heard 
saying,  "  Thou  art  worthy,  O  Lord,  to  receive  glory,  and 
honour,  and  power ;  for  thou  hast  created  all  things,  and 
for  thy  pleasure  they  are  and  were  created."^  But  in 
speaking  of  God's  glory  we  may  more  easily  offend,  with 
St.  Peter  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration,  than  speak 
aright ;  for  "  we  wot  not  what  to  say."  Nevertheless, 
what  God  has  revealed  of  Himself  we  may  with  open 
face  behold.  The  making,  then,  of  this  world  was  for 
His  own  glory.  He  had  delight  to  project,  as  it  were, 
the  idea  of  His  own  wisdom  before  His  holy  sight;  and 
out  of  the  deep  of  His  own  Being  to  breathe  the  host  of 

1)  Bishop  Butler's  Analogy,  p.  311.  2)  Rev.  iv.  11. 


146  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

several  beings  which  no  eye  but  His  may  number.  And 
as  all  was  very  good,  so  each  several  being,  hving  or 
lifeless,  was  as  a  luminous  point  giving  back  the  glory  of 
the  Eternal  wisdom,  and  the  whole  universe  of  God  as  a 
mirror,  faultless  and  blessed,  on  which  the  image  of  the 
Everlasting  lay  in  a  holy  rest.  So  the  heavens  declared 
God's  glory,  and  the  earth  was  filled  with  it,  in  the  day 
when  "  the  morning  stars  sang  together,  and  all  the  sons 
of  God  shouted  for  joy." 

And  that  which  was  the  final  end  of  God's  almighty 
work  in  the  making  of  the  world,  is  likewise  His  highest 
end  in  its  redemption.  For  what  is  it  but  the  making 
again  of  His  first  works  out  of  the  void  and  formless  mat- 
ter of  a  fallen  world  ?  And  yet  even  so  His  work  shall 
doubtless  rise  and  terminate  in  an  higher  perfection  than 
before.  That  the  glory  of  God  is  the  end  and  aim  of 
man's  redemption,  Holy  Scripture  everywhere  teaches  ; 
and  this  also  the  angelic  song  which  was  heard  in  heaven 
on  the  same  night  that  the  Saviour  of  man  was  born, 
when  the  multitude  of  the  celestial  choir  sang  glory  to 
God  in  the  highest,  sufficiently  declares.  And  we  see 
this,  too,  in  what  His  prophets  and  apostles  have  testi- 
fied :  as  Isaiah  that  heard  the  seraphim,  by  the  altar  of 
sacrifice,  cry,  "  Holy,  holy,  holy  is  the  Lord  of  Hosts. 
The  whole  earth  is  full  of  His  glory  :"^  and  as  the  Lord 
Himself  declared,  "  I  am  the  Lord :  that  is  my  name  : 
and  my  glory  will  I  not  give  to  another."^  And  of  the 
gathering  of  His  redeemed  people  we  read,  "  I  am  the 
Lord  thy  God,  the  Holy  One  of  Israel,  thy  Saviour:  I 
gave   Egypt  for  thy  ransom,   Ethiopia  and    Seba  for 

thee Fear  not,  fori  am  with  thee:    1  will  bring 

thy  seed  from  the  east,  and  gather  thee  from  the  west : 
I  will  say  to  the  north.  Give  up;  and  to  the  south.  Keep 
not  back :   bring  my  sons  from  far,  and  my  daughters 

1)  Isaiah  vi.  3.  2)  Isaiah  xlii.  7. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  147 

from  the  ends  of  the  earth  ;  even  every  one  that  is  called 
by  my  name,  for  I  have  created  him  for  my  glory.'" 
And  in  like  manner  the  apostles  teach  us  that  we  were 
"  chosen  in  Christ  before  the  foundation  of  the  world, 
that  we  should  be  holy  and  without  blame  before  Him  in 
love  :  having  predestinated  us  unto  the  adoption  of  chil- 
dren by  Jesus  Christ  to  Himself,  according  to  the  good 
pleasure  of  His  will,  to  the  praise  of  the  glory  of  His 
grace."*  That  in  Christ  all  the  promises  of  God  "  are 
yea,  and  in  Him  Amen,  unto  the  glory  of  God  by  us."^ 
"  For  God,  who  commanded  the  light  to  shine  out  of 
darkness,  hath  shined  in  our  hearts,  to  give  the  light  of 
the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus 
Christ."*  "  And  the  Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt 
among  us;  and  we  beheld  His  glory,  the  glory  as  of  the 
Only  Begotten  of  the  Father."^  And  this  glory  was  not 
manifested  to  us  only,  but  the  whole  working  out  "of  the 
mystery  which  from  the  beginning  of  the  world  hath  been 
hid  in  God,  who  hath  created  all  things  by  Jesus  Christ," 
was  foreordained  "to  the  intent  that  now  unto  the  princi- 
palities and  powers  in  heavenly  places  might  be  known 
by  the  Church  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God."^  Even 
they  who  by  the  most  direct  intuition  see  the  brightness 
of  the  Everlasting,  have  ever  more  and  more  of  a  deeper 
lore  to  learn  by  the  evolving  characters  of  God's  myste- 
rious hand.  The  Church,  even  to  angels,  is  the  book  of 
God's  wisdom,  and  the  mirror  of  His  glory.  It  must  fur- 
ther be  noted  that  this  final  end  of  God's  works  and  ways 
is  nevertheless  so  nigh  to  every  redeemed  man  as  to  be 
also  the  final  end  of  all  his  actions.  "  Ye  are  bought 
with  a  price :  therefore  glorify  God  in  your  body,  and  in 
your  spirit,  which  are  God's.'""     "  Whether  therefore  ye 

1)  Isaiah  xliii.  3,  5,  6,  7.        2)  Eph.  i.  4,  5,  6.  3)  2  Cor.  i.  20. 

4)  2  Cor.  iv.  6.  5)   St.  John  i.  14.  6)   Eph.  iii.  9, 10. 

7)   1  Cor.  vi.  20. 


148        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

eat,  or  drink,  or  whatsoever  ye  do.  do  all  to  the  glory  of 
God."^ 

It  is  not,  however,  necessary  to  multiply  proofs  of  a 
point  which  no  man  is  concerned  to  deny.  It  is  evident 
not  only  from  revelation  but  from  natural  reason,  and  the 
testimony  of  conscience,  that  all  God's  works  and  ways, 
in  creation  and  redemption,  in  mercy  and  in  power,  and 
all  His  mysterious  economy  with  His  Church  and  people, 
by  the  ministry  of  apostles,  and  prophets,  and  angels,  and 
of  His  only  begotten  Son,  all  begin  and  end,  as  a  circle 
returns  into  itself,  in  His  own  incommunicable  glory. 
This,  then,  is  the  chiefest  and  highest  final  cause  of  all. 

2.  But  there  are  also  ends  subordinate,  and  mediate 
to  the  highest  and  last  of  all ;  and  these  too  we  must 
touch  on. 

The  first  and  necessary  means  to  the  manifestation  of 
God's  glory  is  the  manifestation  of  His  nature  and  char- 
acter. We  may  say  that  the  chief  among  subordinate 
ends  to  which  all  the  works  and  ways  of  God  in  the  re- 
demption of  mankind  have  been  directed,  is  the  restora- 
tion of  a  true  knowledge  of  Himself;  or,  in  other  words, 
the  chief  end  of  the  Church  is  the  restoration  to  the  world 
of  a  true  knowledge  of  God.  This  is  so  evident  through- 
out the  whole  of  Scripture  as  to  need  no  proof  From 
the  beginning  of  the  positive  institution  of  His  Church, 
the  foundation-stone  has  been,  "  Hear,  O  Israel :  the 
Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord  f^  and  the  first  of  His  com- 
mandments, "  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God  ;  thou  shalt  have 
no  other  gods  before  me  :"^  and  so  highly  did  God  es- 
teem of  this  chief  doctrine  of  His  Church,  that  He  fenced 
it  with  the  most  fearful  of  all  His  warnings:  "  The  Lord 
thy  God  is  a  consuming  fire,  even  a  jealous  God."^  This 
was  the  rock  of  the  elder,  as  the  Sonship  of  Christ  is  of 
the  later.  Church.     So  St.  Paul  teaches  us  that  the  wick- 

1)   1  Cor.  X.  31.      2)  Deut.  vi.  4.      3)  Exod.  xx.  2,  3.      4)  Deut.  iv.  24. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         149 

edness  of  man  lay  in  this :  "  Because  that  when  they 
knew  God  they  glorified  Him  not  as  God,  neither  were 
thankful ;  but  became  vain  in  their  imaginations,  and 
their  foolish  heart  was  darkened  :  professing  themselves 
to  be  wise,  they  became  fools  ;  and  changed  the  glory  of 
the  incorruptible  God  into  an  image  made  like  to  cor- 
ruptible man,  and  to  birds,  and  to  four-footed  beasts  and 
creeping  things.  Wherefore  God  also  gave  them  up  to 
uncleanness,  through  the  lusts  of  their  own  hearts,  to  dis- 
honour their  own  bodies  between  themselves  :  who 
changed  the  truth  of  God  into  a  lie,  and  worshipped  and 
served  the  creature  more  than  the  Creator,  who  is  blessed 
for  ever.  Amen."^  "  After  that  in  the  wisdom  of  God 
the  world  by  wisdom  knew  not  God  ;  it  pleased  God  by 
the  foolishness  of  preaching  to  save  them  that  believe  :"^ 
as  also  St.  Paul  said  at  Athens,  "  As  I  passed  by  and  be- 
held your  devotions,  I  found  an  altar,  with  this  inscrip- 
tion, '  To  the  unknown  God.'  Whom  therefore  ye  igno- 
rantly  worship.  Him  declare  I  unto  you."^  We  have 
here  in  the  person  of  St.  Paul,  as  it  were,  a  symbol  of 
God's  Church  in  the  world,  its  mission,  and  its  message. 
Let  this  suffice  for  the  Scriptural  proof  that  the  restora- 
tion of  the  true  knowledge  of  God  to  the  world  is  the 
chief  of  all  the  subordinate  ends  of  the  Church. 

3.  The  next  end  of  the  institution  of  the  Church  is  the 
restoration  of  man  to  the  image  of  God.  If  it  should 
seem  that  this  end  ought  to  have  been  placed  before  the 
last,  I  must  beg  the  reader  to  consider  the  following 
points.  First,  that  the  restoration  of  the  true  knowledge 
of  God  is  a  means  to  the  restoration  of  man  to  his  im- 
age. And  next,  that  whatsoever  be  the  event  of  this 
revelation  of  Himself  to  His  creatures,  His  name  shall 
be  glorified.  The  glory  of  the  Lord  was  in  the  pillar 
which  stood  between  the  hosts,  although  the  Egyptians 

1)  Rom.  i.  20,  25.  2)  1  Cor.  i.  21.  3)  Acts  xvii.  23. 


150        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

were  overwhelmed  in  the  sea,  and  the  IsraeUtes  fell  in 
the  wilderness.  St.  Paul  also  says,  "  Thanks  be  unto 
God,  which  always  causeth  us  to  triumph  in  Christ; 
and  maketh  manifest  the  savour  of  His  knowledge  to 
us  in  every  place.  We  are  unto  God  a  sweet  savour 
of  Christ  in  them  that  are  saved  and  in  them  that  perish. 
To  the  one  we  are  the  savour  of  death  unto  death,  and  to 
the  other  the  savour  of  life  unto  life.'"  The  restoration  of 
the  true  knowledge  of  God  is  an  end  broader,  and  higher, 
and  deeper  than  the  salvation  of  Saints :  for  it  is  also 
the  condemnation  of  the  ungodly,  and  the  light  which 
for  judgment  has  entered  into  the  whole  world. '^  And, 
lastly,  we  do  not  know  what  purpose  of  God  it  may 
fulfil  in  the  transcendent  system  of  His  creatures,  of 
which  our  world  is  but  a  part. 

The  great  mystery  of  man's  restoration  to  the  im- 
age of  God,  like  the  mystery  of  his  fall,  runs  through 
the  w^hole  of  Scripture.  It  is  more  than  stated ;  it  is  as- 
sumed everywhere  ;  it  is  one  of  the  great  moral  axioms 
on  which  all  the  word  of  God  is  based.  Sayings  at  first 
sight  remote,  Avill  be  found  to  be  full  of  it.  "  God  cre- 
ated man  in  His  own  image ;  in  the  image  of  God 
created  He  him."^  "  How  can  he  be  clean  that  is  born 
of  a  woman  ?"^  "  I  was  shapen  in  iniquity,  and  in  sin 
did  my  mother  conceive  me."^  Our  Lord  declared  it 
when  He  said,  "  I  am  come  that  they  might  have  life, 
and  that  they  might  have  it  more  abundantly. "^  And 
St.  John  :  "  Now  are  we  the  eons  of  God ;  and  it  doth 
not  yet  appear  what  we  shall  be,  but  we  know  that  when 
he  shall  appear  we  shall  be  like  Him,  ibr  we  shall  see 
Him  as  He  is.'"'  And  St  Paul :  "  We  all  with  open 
face  beholding  as  in  a  glass  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  are 

1)  2  Cor.  ii.  15, 16.        2)  St.  Jolin  iii.  19,  20,  21.        3)  Gen.  i  27. 
4)  Job  XXV.  4, 5.  5)  Ps.  li.  5.  6)  St.Johnx.  10. 

)  St.  John,  1st  £p.  iii.  2. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         151 

changed  into  the  same  image  from  glory,  to  glory  as  by 
the  Spirit  of  the  Lord.'"  He  "shall  change  our  vile 
body,  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto  His  glorious 
body.'"  "  By  man  came  death ;  by  man  came  also  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead :  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so 
in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive." ^  "  It  is  sown  in  cor- 
ruption, it  is  raised  in  incorruption  :  it  is  sown  in  dishon- 
our, it  is  raised  in  glory :  it  is  sown  in  weakness,  it  is  raised 
in  power :  it  is  sown  a  natural  body,  it  is  raised  a  spiritual 
body.  And  so  it  is  written,  the  first  man  Adam  was 
inade  a  living  soul,  the  last  Adam  was  made  a  quickening 
spirit.  The  first  man  is  of  the  earth,  earthy  :  the  second 
man  is  the  Lord  from  heaven.  As  is  the  earthy  such 
are  they  that  are  earthy,  and  as  is  the  heavenly  such  are 
they  also  that  are  heavenly ;  and  as  w^e  have  borne 
the  image  of  the  earthy,  we  shall  also  bear  the  image 
of  the  heavenly."^  "  Whom  he  did  foreknow  he  also  did 
predestinate  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son."^ 
•'  The  earnest  expectation  of  the  creature  waiteth  for  the 
manifestation  of  the  sons  of  God.  For  the  creature  was 
made  subject  to  vanity  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him 
w^ho  halh  subjected  the  same  in  hope.  Because  the 
creature  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of 
corruption  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God. 
For  we  know  that  the  whole  creation  groaneth  and  trav- 
aileth  in  pain  together  until  now.  And  not  only  they, 
but  ourselves  also,  which  have  the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit, 
even  we  ourselves  groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the 
adoption,  to  wit,  the  redemption  of  our  body."^  For  he 
hath  made  us  "  partakers  of  the  Divine  nature;"^  and 
"  the  righteous  shall  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  king- 
dom of  their  Father."^     The  regeneration^  therefore  of 

1)  2  Cor.  iii.  18.  2)  Phil.  iii.  21.  3)   1  Cor.  xv,  21,  22. 

4)   1  Cor.  XV.  42—49.       5)   Rom.  viii.  29.  G)   Rom.  viii.  19,  23. 

7)  2  Pet.  i.  4.  8)  St.  Matth.  xiii.  43.   9)   St.  Matthew. 


152        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

r 

all  His  works,  the  reconstituting  of  all  things  under  a  new 
head:'  that  is  to  say,  the  perfection  of  His  creature,  the 
restoration  of  man  in  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  to  the  image 
of  God,  in  which  he  was  made  at  the  beginning,  is  anoth- 
er subordinate  end  in  the  series  of  final  causes  for  which 
his  Church  was  ordained. 

4.  But  there  is  also  another  still  more  proximate  to  us ; 
and  that  is  the  probation  of  man's  moral  nature.  It  is  not 
simply  the  restoration  of  man  to  the  image  of  God,  but 
his  restoration  under  a  certain  law  and  condition  that 
God  has  willed.  The  frame  of  this  visible  world  shall 
melt  with  fervent  heat,  and  we  know  not  whether  or  no 
the  Everlasting  may  be  pleased  to  recast  its  fused  ele- 
ments into  a  holy  Paradise.  But  the  nature  of  man  is 
otherwise.  God  has  made  him  in  His  own  image.  He 
is  lord  of  all  the  creatures  of  God,  not  so  much  by  his 
reason,  as  by  his  will.  The  mystery  of  moral  choice  and 
self-determination  is  that  which  is  most  truly  Godlike  in 
man.  It  is  a  pregnant  sign  of  man's  fall  that  we  should 
distinguish  from  each  other  these  transcribed  features  of 
the  one  Divine  image — between  the  intelhgential  and 
elective  energies  of  our  spiritual  being.  But  of  this  we 
shall  have  to  speak  more  hereafter.  It  was  by  the  will 
man  fell,  and  through  the  will  he  must  be  raised  again. 
Such  is  his  Maker's  law  ;  and  in  the  reclaiming  of  man 
to  Himself,  He  works  through  the  manifold  actings  of 
volition,  and  resolution,  and  moral  strife,  and  the  strength 
of  self-affirming  will.  He  ordains  that  man  should  over- 
come evil  by  his  own  choice  ;  that  he  should  deliberately 
refuse  to  unite  with  the  powers  that  are  antagonist  to 
God.  The  existence  of  evil  in  the  universe  of  God  can  be 
solved  only  by  the  freedom  of  man's  will,  or  by  the  Mani- 
choean  heresy  of  two  principles.     Th.;  restoration  of  man, 

1)  Ephes.  i.  10. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  153 

though  wrought  by  God,  is  made,  by  the  participation  of 
a  reclaimed  will,  to  be  also  the  work  of  each  restored 
man.  His  restoration  is  the  free  and  conscious  fixing  of 
his  choice  on  God. 

Now  it  is  certain  that  every  living  man  has  in  himself 
a  witness  to  the  great  law  of  moral  trial :  he  is  as  con- 
scious of  the  freedom  of  his  will  as  he  is  of  his  very  life. 
Apart  from  Revelation,  we  have  more  direct  intuitive  evi- 
dence of  the  freedom  of  our  will  than  of  the  existence  of 
God  ;  and  if  we  take  in  the  witness  of  Revelation,  both 
these  primary  truths  are  alike  declared. 

The  condition  of  man  in  Paradise ;  the  warning  to 
Noah  of  things  not  seen  as  yet;  the  whole  life  of  Abra- 
ham, above  all  in  the  sacrifice  of  his  son  ;  the  whole 
economy  ordained  by  God  through  Moses  j  the  very  idea 
of  sacrifices  and  a  priesthood,  of  types  and  adumbrations, 
all  alike  prove  that  God  deals  with  man  as  a  free  and  re- 
sponsible being  placed  here  upon  a  great  moral  trial. 
We  need  do  no  more  than  quote  one  of  many  like  say- 
ings of  God  to  his  people  of  old: — '•  See,  I  have  set  be- 
fore thee  this  day  life  and  good,  death  and   evil I 

call  heaven  and  earth  to  record  this  day  against  you,  that 
I  have  set  before  you  life  and  death,  blessing  and  cursing; 
therefore  choose  life,  that  both  thou  and  thy  seed  may 
live."i 

We  may  take  a  further  illustration  of  the  peculiar 
nature  of  man's  probation  from  two  or  three  remarkable 
passages  in  Holy  Scripture  :  as,  for  instance,  we  read  of 
the  prophet  that  went  to  denounce  King  Ahab,  as  fol- 
lows : — "  A  certain  man  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets  said 
unto  his  neighbour  in  the  word  of  the  Lord,  Smite  me,  I 
pray  thee  ;  and  the  man  refused  to  smite  him.  Then  said 
he  unto  him,  Because  thou  hast  not  obeyed  the  voice  ol 
the  Lord,  behold,  as  soon  as  thou  hast  departed  from  me, 

1)  Deal.  XXX.  15, 19. 


154        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

a  lion  shall  slay  thee.  And  as  soon  as  he  was  departed 
from  him,  a  lion  found  him,  and  slew  him."'  Here  was  a 
probation  and  its  award.  So  again  in  the  case  of  the 
disobedient  prophet  seduced  by  the  old  prophet  in  Bethel. 
And  so  likewise  the  way  in  which  Naaman  was  proved 
before  he  was  cleansed  ;  and  so  also  in  the  probation  of 
Joash,  king  of  Israel.  "  Now  Elisha  was  fallen  sick  of 
the  sickness  whereof  he  died ;  and  Joash,  the  kinoj  of 
Israel,  came  down  unto  him,  and  wept  on  his  face,  and 
said,  O  my  father,  my  father !  the  chariot  of  Israel  and 
the  horsemen  thereof!  And  Elisha  said  unto  him.  Take 
bow  and  arrows  ;  and  he  took  unto  him  bow  and  arrows. 
And  he  said  to  the  king  of  Israel,  Put  thine  hand  upon 
the  bow.  And  he  put  his  hand  upon  it :  and  Elisha  put 
his  hands  upon  the  king's  hands.  And  he  said,  Open  the 
window  eastward  ;  and  he  opened  it.  Then  Elisha  said, 
Shoot :  and  he  shot.  And  he  said.  The  arrow  of  the 
Lord's  deliverance,  and  the  arrow  of  deliverance  from 
Syria  :  for  thou  shalt  smite  the  Syrians  in  Aphek  till  thou 
have  consumed  them.  And  he  said,  Take  the  arrows  ; 
and  he  took  them.  And  he  said  unto  the  King  of  Israel, 
Smite  upon  the  ground ;  and  he  smote  thrice  and  stayed. 
And  the  man  of  God  was  wroth  with  him,  and  said.  Thou 
shouldest  have  smitten  five  or  six  times :  thou  hadst  then 
smitten  Syria  till  thou  hadst  consumed  it ;  whereas  now 
thou  shalt  smite  Syria  but  thrice.'"^  Now  in  all  these 
places  we  see  a  free  moral  agent  put  on  his  probation  by 
the  secret  wisdom  of  God :  we  see  great  results  suspended 
upon  slight  and  unlikely  conditions ;  and  this  is  the  na- 
ture of  the  life  of  faith.  The  word  and  sacraments  of 
Christ  are  addressed  to  the  same  principle  of  the  heart 
of  man.  It  is  through  a  probation  of  the  will  and  moral 
choice  that  God  blesses  us,  and  by  blessing  restores  man 

I)  1  Kings  XX.  35,  36.  2)  2  Kings  xiii.  14—19. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  155 

to  His  favour  and  to  His  own  image.  And  as  He  did  of 
old,  so  does  He  now  try  His  people.  "  All  the  command- 
ments which  I  command  thee  this  day  shall  ye  observe 
to  do,  that  ye  may  hve  and  multiply,  and  go  in  and  pos- 
sess the  land  which  the  Lord  sware  unto  your  fathers. 
And  thou  shalt  remember  all  the  way  which  the  Lord 
thy  God  led  thee  these  forty  years  in  the  wilderness  to 
humble  thee,  and  to  prove  thee,  to  know  what  was  in  thine 
heart,  whether  thou  wouldst  keep  his  commandments  or 
no.  And  he  humbled  thee,  and  suffered  thee  to  hunger, 
and  fed  thee  with  manna,  which  thou  knewest  not;  nei- 
ther did  thy  fathers  know,  that  he  might  make  thee  know 
that  man  doth  not  live  by  bread  only,  but  by  every  word 
that  proceedeth  out  of  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  doth  man 
live  ;"  or,  in  other  words,  that  he  walks  by  faith.  From 
all  that  has  been  said,  we  see  that  the  restoration  of  man 
to  God's  image  is  a  moral  work  wrought  through  a  moral 
probation.  And  it  is  with  a  purpose  of  putting  man  on 
this  trial  that  God  has  shaped  all  His  positive  appoint- 
ments in  the  economy  of  redemption.  This,  therefore, 
is  another,  and,  as  regards  ourselves,  the  immediate  end 
of  the  institution  of  the  Church. 

We  may  now  sum  up  this  present  chapter. 

We  have  seen,  then,  from  Holy  Scripture,  that  the 
highest  and  final  cause  of  all  the  works  and  ways  of  God, 
both  in  creating  and  restoring  the  world,  is  His  own  in- 
communicable glory  ;  and  that,  as  means,  if  laken  in  order 
to  this  end,  or  as  subordinate  ends,  iftaken  by  themselves. 
He  has  ordered  His  appointments  so  as  to  restore  to  the 
world  a  true  knowledcre  of  Himself,  to  restore  mankind 
to  the  image  of  God,  and  to  put  man  upon  a  probation 
of  his  moral  nature ;  and  that  the  positive  appointment 
or  form  in  which  he  has  provided  for  the  accomplishment 
of  these  ends  is  His  Church.    We  have,  therefore,  ar- 


156 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


rived  at  an  outline  of  His  moral  design  in  constituting 
this  visible  body  in  the  earth.  The  next  point  to  be  in- 
quired is,  how  the  unity  of  that  visible  body  is  subservi- 
ent to  the  great  moral  design  which  we  have  here 
ascertained.  And  this  we  may  consider  in  the  next 
chapter. 


CHAPTER    II 


THE      trsriTT     OF     THE 


CHiraCH     A     MEANS   TO   RESTOaE     THE    TRITE 
KNOWLEDGE    OF   GOD. 


We  have  now  seen  what  are  the  final  causes  or  ends 
for  which  God  has  been  pleased  to  ordain  his  Church ; 
and  it  follows  that  we  should  now  examine  in  what  w^ay 
the  unity  of  the  Church  is  subservient  to  His  design. 

And,  first,  as  to  the  highest  end  of  all,  which  is  His 
own  glory."  It  is  not  necessary  that  we  should  adduce 
further  proof,  for  it  will  be  enough  to  show  the  relation  of 
cause  and  consequence  subsisting  between  the  Unity  of 
the  Church,  and  the  subordinate  ends,  which  in  them- 
selves are  the  conditions  of  the  highest. 

The  point,  therefore,  to  be  considered  is,  how  the  Unity 
of  the  Church  subserves  the  purpose  of  God  in  restoring 
a  right  knowledge  of  Himself  to  the  world.  And  it  seems 
self-evident  tliat  the  property  of  Unity  is  that  aspect  of 
the  Church,  so  to  speak,  which  is  divinely  ordained  to 
witness  to  the  Unity  of  God. 

And  this  it  does,  first,  in  the  way  of  symbol.  The 
Church  is  the  type  or  representative  of  the  one  God. 

We  shall  the  better  understand  this,  if  we  consider 
the  antagonist  error  with  which  it  was  designed  to  con- 
tend.   It  is  evident  that  mankind  possessed  in  the  begin- 


158        THE  UNITY  OP  THE  CHURCH. 

ning  a  true  knowledge  of  the  Divine  nature.  Whether 
or  no  before  the  flood  men  fell  into  Polytheism,  we  have 
no  proof  from  Holy  Scripture.  It  was  a  tradition  among 
the  Jews  that  the  first  declension  to  this  error  was  as  old 
as  the  days  of  Enoch.  A  Jewish  writer  says,  "In  the 
days  of  Enoch  the  sons  of  men  grievously  erred,  and  the 
wise  men  of  that  age  became  brutish,  (even  Enoch  him- 
self being  in  the  number  of  them  ;)  and  their  error  was 
this,  that  since  God  had  created  the  stars  and  spheres 
to  govern  the  world,  and  placing  them  on  high  had  be- 
stowed this  honour  on  them,  that  they  should  be  His  minis- 
ters and  subservient  instruments,  men  ought,  therefore,  to 
praise  them,  honour  them,  and  worship  them."^ 

The  earliest  record  of  idolatry  in  Scripture  is  after 
the  flood,  namely,  that  of  Abraham's  family,  from  which 
God  called  him  out*  And  this  is  shown,  also,  by  the 
Teraphim  which  were  taken  from  Laban  by  Rachel.^ 
It  is  plain,  also,  that  idolatry  had  already  become  domi- 
nant among  the  nations  of  Canaan.  It  has  been  much 
controverted,  from  very  early  times,  whether  Polytheism 
and  idolatry  had  their  rise  in  Egypt  or  in  Chaldaea-  The 
balance  of  likelihood  seems  to  incline  towards  the  former,* 
which  well  agrees  with  the  dim  and  unsearchable  anti- 
quity of  the  Egyptian  empire.  But  howsoever  this  may 
be,  as  a  matter  of  history,  there  are  certain  ideal  epochs 
which  may  be  safely  assumed.  As,  first,  it  is  evident  that 
in  the  beginning  all  mankind  knew,  by  the  transmitted 
light  of  the  original  Revelation,  the  true  nature  of  God. 
This  holds  equally  true  of  the  first  generation  after  Adam 
and  after  Noah.  The  Holy  Scripture  teaches  us  that  the 
first  step  to  Polytheism  was  an  apostacy,  or  declension  of 

1)  Maimonidcs,  quoted  by  Cudworth,  Intellectual  System,  p.  467,  ed. 
1678.     See  Ecclus.  xliv.  16. 

2)  Joshua  xxiv.  2.  3)   Genesis  xxxi.  19. 
4)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  pp.  308,  309. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  159 

the  moral  nature  from  God.  "  They  liked  not  to  retain 
God  in  their  knowledge."  The  fear  and  the  lust,  which 
sprang  from  sin,  first  loosened  the  moral  hold  which  the 
heart  had  of  God,  and  then  drew  a  cloud  over  the  intel- 
lectual sight  of  man.  He  had  lost  the  idea  of  purity  and 
truth,  and  the  holiness  of  God  was  as  an  unintelligible 
character.  It  was  visible,  but  unintelligible.  He  had 
lost  the  key,  and  he  could  not  read  it.  And  this  readily 
explains  the  strange  forgetfulness  which  seemed  to  blot 
the  image  of  God  from  man's  heart.  The  mind  of  man 
cannot  long  remember  any  thing  that  it  does  not  either 
understand  or  love.  Man  had  lost  both  these  holds  on 
the  knowledge  of  God.  The  creatures  of  the  visible 
world  ceased  to  be  relative  symbols :  they  became  abso- 
lute beings  ;  and  men  worshipped  the  hieroglyphic  forms 
when  they  had  lost  their  meaning.  Again,  with  the  right 
knowledge  of  God  they  forfeited  also  the  consciousness 
of  His  presence ;  yet  they  could  not  be  unconscious  of 
the  powers  of  Nature.  These  were  present,  working 
upon  them,  ministering  to  them,  baffling  them,  controlling 
them  ;  and  to  these  they  bowed  down  and  worshipped. 
The  ministries  and  energies  of  nature  were  severed,  and 
impersonated,  and  projected  before  the  mind  as  beings 
higher  than  man.^  And  hence  came  Polytheism,  which 
was  the  elder  brother  of  idolatry.  The  same  ideal  pro- 
cess elevated  to  the  rank  of  gods  the  passions  and  affec- 
tions of  the  human  soul;  they  were  motive  powers,  ever 
present  in  all  places  and  to  all  men,  calming  the  human 
heart  or  lashing  it  into  a  storm,  according  to  an  universal 
law.  The  universality  and  the  power  of  their  own  mys- 
terious nature  men  took  for  gods  external  to  themselves. 
From  the  same  law  of  the  mind,  which  worshipped  all 
that  had  power  over  itself,  came  also  the  deifying  of  men. 
All  who,  by  wisdom  or  power,  governed  their  fellow-men 

1)   Cud  worth,  p.  229. 


ifeo 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


— all  who,  in  the  arts  of  life,  had  arisen  as  great  benefac- 
tors of  mankind — the  founders  of  empires,  and  the  mas- 
ter-minds that  sketched  out  the  first  platforms  of  civil 
polity, — were  by  an  over-awed  and  grateful  recollection 
invested  with  accumulated  honours,  and  inscribed  among 
the  gods.  It  is  evident  that  minds  of  a  higher  than  com- 
mon power  wrought  up  into  system,  and  impressed  a 
form  upon  the  rude  materials  of  popular  misbelief:  a 
strong  process  of  abstraction  and  a  deep  mystical  import 
are  found  running  through  the  Pagan  Polytheism.  It 
was  philosophical  as  well  as  fabulous.  And  this  was  the 
work  of  higher  minds  pondering  upon  the  imaginations 
of  other  men,  and,  by  a  reflex  act,  upon  their  own.  Idol- 
atry is  a  further  step,  being  a  clothing  of  gross  and  visi- 
ble forms  thrown  over  the  abstractions  which  have  other- 
wise no  representative  or  symbol.  I  have  dwelt  the 
longer  on  this  point  because  it  would  seem  that  even  the 
Pagan  world  did  not  altogether  lose  the  idea  of  one  only 
supreme  God.  The  deities  of  Polytheism  were  subordi- 
nate, finite,  and  created.  There  was  still  retained  the 
idea  of  a  monarchy  over  gods  and  men,  vested  in  one  who 
was  the  Ruler  of  all,  and  in  some  sort  acknowledged  as 
the  one  supreme  God.  It  may  be  indeed  true  that,  among 
the  multitude  of  grosser  and  darker  minds,  many  may 
have  risen  no  higher  than  the  visible  forms  of  their  idol- 
atry, and  others  only  so  far  as  to  apprehend  the  exist- 
ence of  finite  beings,  to  whom  the  sensible  idols  were  as 
a  material  clothing ;  and  this,  because  to  a  finite  mind  the 
thought  of  infinity  is  strange  and  burdensome.  So  Pliny 
explains  it — "  Frail  and  wearied  mortality,  mindful  of  its 
own  infirmity,  has  thus  crumbled  (the  Deity)  into  frag- 
ments, that  every  one  might  worship  those  portions  he 
stood  most  in  need  of"^  It  would  nevertheless  appear, 
that  the  reason  of  mankind  in  all  ages  has  tended  again 

1)  See  Reeves's  Apologies,  Note,  vol.  ii.  p.  100. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  l(ll 

towards  a  belief  in  one  supreme,  uncreated  God,  the 
maker  and  governor  of  all,  both  gods  and  men:  I  say 
tended  towards  the  behef,  because  it  was  plainly  no  more 
than  an  approximation  to  the  truth  which  nothing  but  a 
revelation  from  God  could  restore  to  the  world.  If  we 
examine  the  language  of  the  most  enlightened,  and  that 
in  times  when  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Unity,  intrusted 
to  the  Jewish  Church,  may  be  supposed  to  have  affected 
the  course  of  thought  even  in  the  Gentile  schools,^  we 
shall  still  perceive  the  truth  of  the  Apostle's  words,  that 
"  the  world  by  wisdom  knew  not  God."  In  the  Philo- 
sophical Schools,  the  One  Supreme  God  is  "  called  6 
/I  r^Kiovoyoq,  the  Opifex,  architect  and  maker  of  the  world  ; 
o  'Hysao)i'  rov  TTavroq  y.al  'Ao/rjyfrrjq^  the  prince  and  chief 
ruler  of  the  universe  ;  6  Ttnojtoq  y.at  o  nQontaroq  Gshq  by 
the  Greeks ;  and  by  the  Latins,  Primus  Deus,  the  first 
God  :  o  Tzooiroq  vovq,  the  first  Mind ;  6  Mf'yctq  Qfoq,  the 
great  God  ;  6  Mf'yKjroq  Ja{;.to)v  and  6  fif'ytriroq  Qioiv,  the 
greatest  God  and  the  greatest  of  the  Gods  ;  o"YrpLaToq,  the 
highest,  and  o  vTtatoq  Oeoiv,  the  supreme  of  the  Gods  ;  6 
avondro)  Gfoq,  the  uppermost,  or  most  transcendent  God ; 
Princeps  ille  Deus,  that  chief  or  principal  God  ;  Qthq  Siiav, 
the  God  of  Gods  ;  and  'Air/i]  ao/Jn;  the  principle  of  prin- 
ciples ;  TO  noonov  aXtiov,  the  first  cause  ;  o  rods  to  nav 
yivri^rjaq,  He  that  generated  or  created  this  whole  uni- 
verse ;  6  KoaTf'ojv  rov  Trarroq,  He  that  ruleth  over  the 
whole  world  ;  Summus  Rector  et  Dominus,  the  supreme 
Governor  and  Lord  of  all ;  o  iTil  naai  Osoct  the  God  over  all ; 
o  0?oq  ayfvvr^Toq,  auroyfrijq,  avro(fvijq,  ax'd-vnonraxoq^  the 
Ingenerate,  or  unmade,  self-originated  and  self-subsisting 
Deity;  Mnvaq  a  Monad;  ro'fvy.al  avxoayaO-nv,  Unity 
and  Goodness  itself;  to  intyfiva  rijq  ovalaq  and  to  {Txeq- 
ovaiov,  that  which  is  above  essence,  or  superessential ;  to 
iTir/.Hva  vol',  that  which  is  above  mind  and  understanding; 

1)  Gale's  Court  of  the  Gentiles,  part  ii.  b  2,  c.  8. 
8* 


162  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Summum  illud  et  aBternum,  neque  mutabile  neque  interi- 
turum,  that  supreme  and  eternal  Being  which  is  immu- 
table and  can  never  perish  ;  'Aqx^,  kcu  re'Xoq,  y.al  [liaov^ 
andvtoiv,  the  Beginning,  and  End,  and  Middle  of  all 
things ;  'Ev  xal  ndvra,  One  and  all  things ;  Deus  unus  et 
omnes,  One  God  and  all  Gods.  And  lastly,  to  name  no 
more,  -^  JJoovoia,  or  Providence,  as  distinguished  from 
Ovoiq^  Nature,'"  And  this  has  been  declared  by  some 
to  be  the  tone  of  all  Pagans,  that  there  was  "  One  God, 
the  King  and  Father  of  all.  and  many  gods,  the  sons  of 
God,  reigning  together  with  God."^ 

It  may  not  be  amiss  to  throw  together  in  a  summary 
way  the  views  which  have  been  entertained  respecting 
the  character  and  intent  of  the  Gentile  Polytheism  ;  we 
shall  then  more  clearly  see  to  what  particular  points  the 
testimony  of  the  Church  is  directed. 

And,  first,  it  is  remarkable  that  we  find  Hebrew 
writers,  who,  it  might  be  thought,  would  be  most  exact 
in  a  point  which  constituted  the  broad  characteristic 
difference  between  the  faith  of  Israel  and  the  false  re- 
ligion of  the  Gentile  world,  adopting  a  view  more  favour- 
able than  the  facts  of  primitive  history  would  seem  to 
warrant. 

Maimonides,  in  the  twelfth  century,  writes  of  the 
Gentile  idolatry  as  follows : — "  The  foundation  of  that 
commandment  against  strange  worship  is  this,  that  no 
man  should  worship  any  of  the  creatures  whatsoever,  nei- 
ther angel,  nor  sphere,  nor  star,  nor  any  of  the  four  ele- 
ments, nor  any  thing  made  out  of  them  :  for  though  he 
that  worships  these  things  knows  that  the  Lord  is  God, 
and  superior  to  them  all,  and  worships  these  creaiures  no 
otherwise  than  Enoch  and  the  rest  of  that  age  did,  yet  is 
he  nevertheless  guilty  of  strange  worship  and  idolatry."^ 

1)  Cudworth,  Intcll.  System,  pp.  264,  265.        2)  Cudwortli,  p.  234. 
3)   Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p.  468. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  163 

In  this  and  in  the  following  passages,  it  is  asserted  that 
these  created  beings  were  worshipped  by  them  only  as 
ministers  of  God's  Providence,  and  mediators  between 
them  and  Him.  "  You  know  that  whosoever  committeth 
idolatry,  he  doth  it  not  as  supposing  that  there  is  no  other 
God  besides  that  which  he  worshippeth,  for  it  never  came 
into  the  minds  of  any  idolaters,  nor  ever  will,  that  the 
statue  which  is  made  by  them  of  metal,  or  stone,  or  wood, 
is  that  very  God  who  created  heaven  and  earth  :  but  they 
worship  these  statues  and  Images  only  as  the  represen- 
tation of  something  which  is  a  mediator  between  God 
and  them."^  And,  in  another  place,  "  The  idolaters  first 
argued  thus  in  respect  of  God :  that  since  He  was  of 
such  transcendent  perfection  above  men,  it  was  not  possi- 
ble for  men  to  be  united  to  or  to  have  communion  with 
Him,  otherwise  than  by  certain  middle  beings  or  media- 
tors, as  it  is  the  manner  of  earthly  kings  to  have  petitions 
conveyed  to  them  by  the  hands  of  mediators  and  inter- 
cessors. Secondly,  they  thus  argued  also  in  respect  of 
themselves:  that  being  corporeal,  so  that  they  could  not 
apprehend  God  abstractedly,  they  must  needs  have 
something  sensible  to  excite  and  stir  up  their  devotion, 
and  lo  fix  their  imagination  upon."^  And  in  the  same 
way  another  Jewish  writer  explains  the  idolatry  of  Ahab 
and  other  kings  of  Israel  and  Judah.  They  "erred  in 
worshipping  the  stars  on  these  two  accounts  mentioned 
by  Maimonides,  notwithstanding  that  they  believed  the 
existence  of  God  and  His  Unity  ;  they  partly  conceiving 
that  they  should  honour  God  in  worshipping  His  ministers, 
and  partly  worshipping  them  as  mediators  betwixt  God 
and  themselves."^ 

And  in  like  manner  he  explains  the  First  Command- 
ment. "  Thou  shall  not  set  up  other  inferior  gods  as 
mediators  betwixt  me  and  thyself,  or  worship  them,  so 

1)  Cudworth,  Int,  Syst.  p.  468,  2)  Tb.  3)  lb.  p   4G9. 


164         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

as  thinking  to  honour  me  thereby.'"  These  Hebrew 
writers  reduced  the  Geniile  Polytheism  and  idolatry  to 
these  three  heads: — First,  tlie  worshipping  the  ministers 
of  God,  as  thinking  to  honour  Him  thereby.  Secondly, 
the  worshipping  them  as  intercessors  with  God.  And 
lastly,  the  worshipping  of  material  representations  or 
memorials  of  God.  And  this  view  may  be  gathered 
also  from  incidental  notices  scattered  through  their  other 
writings.  Maimonides,  expounding  Jeremiah  xi.  7,  says, 
"  As  if  he  should  say,  all  the  Gentiles  know  that  Thou  art 
the  only  Supreme  God,  but  their  error  and  folly  consists 
in  this — that  they  think  their  vanity  of  w^orshipping  infe- 
rior gods  to  be  a  thing  agreeable  to  Thy  will."^  And  so 
Kimchi  writes,  "Neither  do  they  worship  the  stars  other- 
wise than  as  mediators  betwixt  Thee  and  them.  These 
wise  men  know  that  an  idol  is  nothing ;  and  though  they 
worship  stars,  yet  do  they  worship  them  as  Thy  minis- 
ters, and  that  they  may  be  intercessors  for  them."^  And 
again  on  Malachi  i.  11:  "Although  the  Pagans  wor- 
shipped the  Host  of  Heaven,  yet  do  they  confess  Me  to 
be  the  first  cause,  they  worshipping  them  only  as  in  their 
opinion  certain  mediators  betwixt  Me  and  them."^ 

We  may  now  take  the  testimony  of  Christian  writers ; 
and  first  that  of  the  Apostle  St.  Paul.  In  writing  to  the 
Romans,  he  charges  the  Gentiles  with  "holding  the 
truth  in  unrighteousness."  The  knowledge  of  the  one 
God,  such  as  they  still  had,  they  held  in  the  bondage  of 
their  impure  and  darkened  hearts.  He  then  says,  "  They 
liked  not  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge"  (ir  infyrwaBi), 
that  is,  in  an  habitual,  and  conscious,  or  practical — i.  e.,  a 
moral  knowledge.  Wherefore,  in  the  same  chapter,  he 
acknowledges  them  to  possess  a  knowledge  of  some  sort. 
"  Because  that  which  may  be  known  of  God  is  manifest 
in  them,  for  God  hath  showed  it  unto  them  :"  (To  yrojarov 

1)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p  469.        2)  lb.  p.  470.        3)  lb.        4)  lb. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  165 

rov  &SOV  (pavfoov  iariv  iv  dvrolq'  6  yao  Oioq  avroiq 
iq:affoujoe) — that  is,  His  eternal  power  and  Godhead 
manifested  in  His  created  works.  They  had  as  it  were  a 
natural,  as  distinguished  from  a  moral  knowledge  of  him. 
Therefore  "  they  glorified  Him  not  as  God,"  of  which 
adoration  the  moral  knowledge  is  a  necessary  condition  : 
"neither  were  they  thankful."  And  they  fell  even  to 
worshipping  the  works  of  His  hands ;  and  "  they  wor- 
shipped and  served  the  creature  (either  besides,  i.  e.,  in 
addition  to,  or  beyond)  more  than  the  Creator."  Both 
these  senses  ultimately  run  up  into  one.  They  multiplied 
the  objects  of  worship,  and  gave  to  each  several  god  a 
portion  of  that  which  is  wholly  due  to  the  one  true  God 
alone.  And  this  seems  plainly  the  meaning  of  St.  Paul 
at  Athens,  where  he  charges  them  with  being  "  too 
superstitious,"  or  rather  "  more  than  commonly  devout  :"^ 
the  excess  of  this  devotion  terminating  on  objects  below 
the  one  true  God. 

The  uninspired  writers  of  the  Church  seem  to  adopt 
the  views  of  the  philosophical  schools  :  of  many  passages, 
we  may  take  the  following : — Clement  of  Alexandria  says, 
"  But  that  the  chief  men  among  the  Greeks  know  God, 
not  according  to  knowledge  (6v  y.ax  iniyrojaiv),  but  ac- 
cording to  an  indirect  manifestation.  St.  Peter  declares  in 
his  Predication,  'Ye  know,  therefore,  that  there  is  one 
God  who  made  the  beginning  of  all  things,  and  has 
power  over  the  end  :  and  the  Invisible,  who  seeth  all 
things,  who  cannot  be  contained  of  any,  but  containeth 
all  things,  &c.  Himself  uncreate,  who  created  all  things 
by  the  word  of  His  power,  that  is,  according  to  the  mys- 
tical sense  of  Scripture,  by  His  Son.'  Then  he  adds, 
'  Worship  ye  this  God,  not  as  the  Greeks  do,'  as  signify- 
ing that  the  chief  of  the  Greeks  worship  the  same  God 

1)  For  the  correctness  of  this  interpretation,  see  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p. 
471—474. 


166        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

as  we,  but  not  according  to  the  perfect  knowledge  (ov 
y.ar  inlyvwaiv  navrs).}})  which  they  have  who  have  learn- 
ed by  the  tradition  of  the  Son.  He  does  not  say,  '  Wor- 
ship not  the  God  whom  the  Greeks  worship,  but,  Worship 
Him  not  as  the  Greeks  do :  changing  the  mode  of  the 
worship  of  God,  not  preaching  another  God.  What 
this — '  not  as  the  Greeks  do' — signifies,  Peter  himself  will 
make  plain,  adding,  '  Because  being  carried  away  by  ig- 
norance, and  not  knowing  God  as  one  according  to  the 
perfeci  knowledge,  they  forming  into  shapes  those  things 
over  which  he  had  given  them  the  power  of  use,  namely, 

wood  and  stones,  brass  and  iron,  gold  and  silver 

do  worship  them.'  "  Clement  adds,  "  He  dispensed  unto  us 
a  New  Covenant.  For  the  Covenants  of  the  Greeks  and 
of  the  Jews  are  old.  Ye  who,  in  third  place,  worship 
God  after  a  new  manner  are  Christians.  For  he  clearly 
showed,  I  conceive,  that  the  one  and  only  God  was  known 
by  the  Greeks  after  a  Gentile  manner,  by  the  Jews  after 
a  Jewish,  but  by  us  in  a  new  and  spiritual  way.  More- 
over, he  shows  that  the  same  God  is  the  giver  of  both 
the  Covenants,  who  was  also  the  giver  of  the  Greek 
philosophy  to  the  Greeks,  through  which  the  Almighty  is 
glorified  by  the  Greeks." '  Laciantius,  also  writing  against 
Polytheism,  says,  "  They  affirm  these  gods  of  theirs  so 
to  preside  over  the  several  parts  of  the  world,  as  that 
there  is  only  one  chief  rector  or  governor  :  likewise  it  fol- 
lows that  all  their  other  gods  can  be  nothing  else  than 
ministers  and  officers  which  the  one  greatest  God  who  is 
omnipotent  hath  variously  appointed  and  constituted,  so 
as  to  serve  His  command  and  nod.'"^  So  also  Eusebius 
gives  the  following  account  of  the  Pagan  system  : — '•  The 
Pagans  declare  themselves  in  this  manner,  that  there  is 
one  God.  who  with  His  various  powers  filleth  all  things, 
and  passeth  through  all  things,  and  presideth  over  all 

1)  S   Clem.  AI.»x.  Ptroin.  vi.  ^35.  2)  Cudunrth,  Int.  Sy=!t.  p.  979. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  167 

things,  but  being  incorporeally  and  invisibly  present  in  all 
tilings,  and  pervading  them,  he  is  reasonably  worship- 
ped by  or  in  those  things  that  are  manifest  and  visi- 
ble."^ St.  Augustin,  in  his  writings  against  Faustns  the 
Manichsean,  who  had  objected  to  the  Christians  that  they 
had  borrowed  the  doctrine  of  this  sole  government  of  one 
God  from  the  Pagans,  says,  "  Let  Faustus  therefore  learn, 
or  rather  they  who  are  delighted  with  his  writings,  that 
we  have  not  received  the  belief  of  God's  sole  government 
from  the  Gentiles,  but  that  the  Gentiles  were  not  so  far 
fallen  to  false  gods  as  to  lose  the  belief  of  one  true  God, 
by  whom  all  nations  of  whatsoever  kind  exist.'"'^  He  then 
quotes  the  words  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Romans,  already 
cited.  We  may  now  take  the  testimony  of  one  or  two  of 
the  later  Pagans.  It  is  not  unreasonable  to  believe  that 
as  the  truths  of  the  Gospel  prevailed,  they  so  far  yielded 
to  the  pressure  of  Christianity  as  to  throw  their  Poly- 
theism into  a  more  abstract  and  subtler  shape.  We 
find  them  holding  the  same  language  as  Maimonides  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria.  Celsus  speaks  frequently  of 
one  Supreme  God  whom  he  calls  the  first  God  (rhv  ttqojtov 
Geov),  the  greatest  God  (rdv  /nfyiorov  Qaot'\  the  super- 
celestial  God  (xov  vmoovodvLov  0(ov),  and  the  like.^  In 
the  same  language  Porphyry  asserted  one  Supreme 
Deity,  and  one  only,  unmade,  and  self-existent  (ayfvrtjTor) 
principle  of  all  things.*  The  Emperor  Julian,  in  like 
manner,  after  asserting  that  there  is  one  comm.on  Father 
and  King  over  all,  but  that  the  tutelage  of  particular 
regions  is  assigned  to  inferior  deities,  says,  "Whereas 
in  the  common  Father  all  things  are  perfect,  and  one  in 
all ;  in  the  particular  or  partial  deities,  one  excels  in 
one  power,  another  in  another."^ 

In  exactly  the  same  tone  the  philosophers  and  learned 

1)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p.  280.  2)  S.  Aug.  contra  Faust,  lib.  xx.  c.  19. 

3)  Cudworth,  Int.  Pyst.  p.  270.  4)  Ih.  p.  27T.  5)  Tb.  p.  274. 


168        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

men  among  the  Pagans,  after  the  time  of  Constantine 
and  in  the  decline  of  their  system,  such  as  lambHchus, 
Syrianus,  Proclus,  Simplicius,  and  many  others,  clearly 
acknowledged  one  Supreme  God  as  the  first  cause  of  ail 
things.  I  will  give  one  more  passage  from  the  letter  of 
Maximus  of  Madaurato  St.  Augusiin  :— "  Forsooth,  that 
there  is  one  God  supreme,  without  beginning,  without 
offspring,  the  Father,  so  to  speak,  of  Nature,  great  and 
wonderful,  who  is  there  so  beside  himself,  so  diseased  in 
mind,  as  to  deny  to  be  a  most  certain  truth.  It  is  His 
energies  diffused  throughout  the  world  that  we  invoke 
with  many  names,  forasmuch  as  we  all  of  us  are  igno- 
rant of  His  own  proper  name.  For  '  God'  is  a  name 
common  to  all  religions  ;  and  so  it  is,  that  whilst  we  ad- 
dress as  it  were  His  members  severally  with  various 
supplications,  we  evidently  may  be  seen  to  worship  the 
whole.'" 

The  many  philosophical  theories  respecting  the  one 
first  cause,  the  Maker  and  Governor  of  the  world,  may 
be  reduced  at  last  to  two:  One,  that  the  Divine  Being 
was  diffused  throughout  the  world  as  a  quickening  soul, 
which  is  Pantheism  :  The  other,  that  He  was  a  Spiritual 
Being,  superior  to  the  world  which  He  had  created. 
According  to  the  first  theory,  the  visible  things  of  crea- 
tion were  manifestations  of  Himself.  According  to  the 
second,  they  were  only  His  ministers.  There  remains  a 
still  further  refinement  of  diis  latter  opinion  to  be  noticed. 
There  were  some  who  taught  that  the  visible  creatures 
were  worthy  to  be  worshipped  only  as  the  expressions  of 
ideas,  or  patterns  in  the  Divine  mind.  They  taught  that 
in  God  there  exists  an  archetypal  world,  of  which  this 
material  world  is  only  the  representative.  They  con- 
tended, therefore,  that  their  worship  was  paid,  not  to  the 
sensible  objects,  but  to  the   Divine  ideas  which  are  in 

])  S.  Aug.  ii.  20. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH  169 

the  mind  of  God  Himself.  This  was  held  by  the  Empe- 
ror Julian,  who  says,  "Plato,  indeed,  speaketh  of  certain 
visible  gods,  the  sun  and  the  moon,  and  the  stars,  and 
the  heavens  ;  but  these  are  all  but  the  images  of  other 
invisible  gods  :  that  visible  sun  which  we  see  with  our 
eyes  is  but  an  image  of  another  intelligible  and  invisible 
one  (tou  vorirov  xal  firj  (pairofiiron),  so  likewise  the  visi- 
ble moon  and  every  one  of  the  stars  are  but  the  images 
and  resemblances  of  another  moon  and  of  other  intelli- 
gible stars.  Wherefore  Plato  acknowledged  also  these 
other  invisible  gods  inexisting  and  coexisting  with  the 
Demiurgus  from  whom  they  were  generated  and  pro- 
duced.'" It  is  evident  also  from  Philo  that  this  notion 
was  not  peculiar  to  the  Platonizing  pagans  of  the  later 
times,^  but  had  been  known  long  before- 

To  so  high  a  point  did  some  of  the  Greek  philoso- 
phers carry  their  theology,  that  we  may  find  apparent 
adumbrations  of  a  Trinity  in  the  Unity  of  the  Godhead  : 
I  say  adumbrations,  designing  to  express  a  general  and 
inexact  shadowing  out  of  the  true  doctrine. 

In  the  arcana  of  the  ancient  Greek  philosophy  there 
existed  a  doctrine  concerning  a  Divine  Triad.  We  find 
one  speaking  of  three  Divine  Hypostases  (rufiq  do/cti'y.al 
VTtoarcicfeiq,  I.  e.,  to  dydO-ov,  or  h',  rovq,  rpv/i])  Or  Monad, 
.mind  and  soul;  and  affirming  this  to  be  no  new  doc- 
trine. "  That  these  doctrines,"  he  says,  "  are  not  new, 
nor  of  yesterday,  but  have  been  very  anciently  delivered, 
though  obscurely,  (the  discourses  now  extant  being  but 
explications  of  them,)  appears  from  Plato's  own  writings, 
Parmenides  before  him  having  insisted  on  them."^ 

The  Triad  of  Parmenides  is  thus  expressed  by  Ploti- 
nus  : — "  Parmenides  in  Plato,  speaking  now  exactly,  dis- 
tiguishes  three  Divine  Unities  subordinate :  the  first,  of 

1)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p,  499.  2)  lb.  p.  501. 

3)  Ptolemus,  quoted  by  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p.  546. 


170        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

that  which  is  perfectly  and  most  properly  one  (to  nqonov 
iv) ;  the  second,  of  that  which  was  called  by  him  One- 
many  (f  1'  TToV.a) ;  the  third,  of  that  which  is  thus  ex- 
pressed, one  and  many  (*V  y.al  7Zo)da)."^  The  Platonic 
Triad  consisted  of  goodness  (to  ayad-ov),  wisdom  Q.oyoq, 
ancpfa,  vovq),  and  life,  power,  and  action  (i//i';f7;) ;  and 
these  he  taught  were  absolutely  one  being,  each  com- 
prehended in  the  others ;  all  being  self-existent  and 
eternal,  three  Hypostases  in  one  D  vine  nature.' 

Numenius,  who  was  a  later  Pythagorean,  held  the 
same  tenet  as  a  part  of  the  system  of  Pythagoras  ;  and 
Moderatus  affirms  this  Trinity  of  principles  to  be  one  of 
the  Pythagorean  Cabala  :  lamblichus  also  sa3's,  -'That 
there  were  three  gods  praised  by  the  Pythagoreans."^ 
It  has  been  thought  that  the  Pythagorean  theology  was 
derived  from  the  Orphic ;  that  Orpheus  was  only  the 
promulgator  of  a  still  more  ancient  tenet ;  and  that  Or- 
pheus, Pythagoras,  and  Plato,  who  all  alike  held  a 
Divine  Triad,  had  been  initiated  into  the  theology  of  the 
Egyptians:  from  which  it  has  been  supposed  that  this 
was  an  article  of  their  arcana  or  Esoteric  theology.  Be 
this  as  it  may,  there  are  some  traces  of  a  Trinity  in  the 
Mithraic  mysteries  derived  by  the  Persians  from  Zoro- 
aster ;  in  the  Chaldean  oracles  of  the  Magi,  and  in  the 
Samothracian  doctrines ;  and,  lastly,  the  Ternary  or 
Triad,  was  a  number  generally  regarded  by  the  Greeks 
and  Pagans  as  containing  some  mystery  in  nature,  and 
was,  therefore,  used  in  their  religious  rites.  Aristotle 
says,  "  Wherefore  from  nature,  and  as  it  were  observing 
her  laws,  have  we  taken  this  number  of  three,  making 
use  of  the  same  in  the  sacrifices  of  the  gods  and  other 
purifications."^ 

1)  Ptolemus,  quoted  by  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  pp.  386,  387. 

2)  lb.  pp.  386,  387.  3)  lb.  pp.  572,  573,  576,  577,  578. 

4)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p.  517.         5)  lb.  p.  547.    Arist.  de  Ccelo,  1.  i.  c.  5. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  171 

It  seems  then,  first,  that  a  beUef  in  One  Supreme 
God,  invisible,  alone  uncreated,  the  Governor  of  all,  was 
not  altogether  lost. 

Secondly,  that  a  multitude  of  subordinate,  finite, 
generated,  and  visible  deities  was  both  acknowledged 
and  worshipped  either  as  distinct  gods,  or  as  ministers 
and  mediators  between  man  and  the  Supreme  God. 

Thirdly,  that  a  doctrine  concerning  a  Divine  Triad 
was  held,  and  transmitted  through  the  secret  theologies 
and  philosophical  schools. 

But  it  must  be  observed  that  their  purest  doctrine  of 
the  Divine  unity  was  held  to  be  consistent  with  a  belief 
in,  and  a  worship  of,  many  gods.  It  taught  no  moral  re- 
lations nor  particular  providence  of  love  and  mercy. ^ 

We  may  now  go  on  to  examine  how  the  Church  is  so 
constituted,  in  the  particular  property  of  its  Unity,  as  to 
restore  the  true  knowledge  of  God  in  the  world. 

And,  first,  by  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Faith  the 
Church  has  taken  up  all  philosophies  and  consolidated 
them  in  one.  Whether  by  the  momentum  of  an  original 
revelation,  or  by  the  continual  guidance  of  a  heavenly 
teaching,  or  by  the  natural  convergence  of  the  reason  of 
man  towards  the  unseen  realities  of  truth,  it  is  most 
certain  that  all  thoughtful  and  purer  minds  were  gazing 
one  way  :  as  the  fulness  of  time  drew  on,  their  eyes  were 
more  and  more  intently  fixed  on  one  point  in  the  horizon, 
"  more  than  they  that  watch  for  the  morning ;"  and  all 
the  lights  of  this  fallen  world  were  bent  towards  one  cen- 
tral region,  in  which  at  last  they  met  and  kindled.  The 
one  Faith  was  the  focus  of  all  philosophies,  in  which 
they  were  fused,  purified,  and  blended.  The  Monad  and 
the  Triad  were  transfigured  into  Three  Persons  in  One 
God.     The  subordination  of  the  Platonic  Triad  was  veri- 

1)  Mill  on  the  Pantheistic  Theory,  p.  1 ;  and  Notices  of  the  Mosaic  Law 
by  H.  J.  Rose,  pp.  25  and  83, 84. 


17'2  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

fied  in  the  ministrative  offices  of  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  The  eternity,  the  uncreated  substance,  the  in- 
finity of  goodness,  wisdom,  and  power,  the  transcendent 
majesty,  the  true  personaHty,  and  the  moral  providence 
of  the  One  Supreme  Maker  and  Ruler  of  the  World,  was 
affirmed  from  heaven.  The  scattered  truths  which  had 
wandered  up  and  down  the  earth,  and  had  been  in  part 
adored,  and  in  part  held  in  unrighteousness,  were  now 
elected  and  called  home,  and  as  it  were  regenerated,  and 
gathered  into  one  blessed  company,  and  glorified  once 
more  as  the  witnesses  of  the  Eternal. 

God  was  manifested  as  the  life  of  the  world,  and  yet 
not  so  as  to  be  one  with  the  world  ;  but  as  distinct,  yet  fill- 
ing all  things.  God  was  manifested  as  the  source  of  life 
to  man.  The  affinity  of  the  soul  of  man  to  God  was 
revealed  ;  and  the  actual  participation  of  man,  through 
the  gift  of  grace,  in  the  Divine  nature,  and  yet  not  so  as 
to  extinguish  the  distinct  and  immortal  being  of  each 
individual  soul. 

In  thus  taking  up  into  itself  all  the  scattered  family  of 
truth,  the  one  Faith  abolished  all  the  intermingling  false- 
hoods of  four  thousand  years.  Therefore  it  follows  as  a 
just  corollary,  that  in  affirming  the  unity  and  sovereignty 
of  God,  it  annihilated  the  whole  system  of  many  subor- 
dinate deities.  It  declared  absolutely  that  there  is  no 
God  but  One  ;  that  all  created  being  is  generically  dis- 
tinct, and  has  in  it  no  divine  prerogative.  It  taught 
mankind  that  the  wisest  and  the  best  of  earth  pass  not 
the  bounds  of  man's  nature  ;  that  the  passions  and  ener- 
gies of  mankind  are,  by  God's  ordinance,  parts  of  man's 
own  being;  that  they  are  not  his  lords,  but  themselves 
subject  to  his  control ;  that  the  powers  of  nature  are  no 
gods,  but  pressures  of  the  one  Almighty  Hand  ;  and  that 
the  visible  works  of  God  are  fellow-creatures  with  man, 
and  put  under  his  feet. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  173 

And,  as  a  second  corollary,  it  follows  that  the  One 
Faith,  in  restricting  the  Divine  nature,  restricts  also  all 
worship  to  the  One  Supreme  God. 

Josephus  says  that  Abraham  was  "  the  first  that  ven- 
tured to  publish  this  notion,  that  there  was  but  one  God, 
the  Creator  of  the  Universe  ;  and  that  as  to  other  [gods], 
if  they  contributed  any  thing  to  the  happiness  of  men, 
that  each  of  them  afforded  it  only  according  to  his  ap- 
pointment, and  not  by  their  own  power."  He  adds  : 
"  So  far  as  they  co-operate  to  our  advantage,  they  do  it 
not  of  their  own  abilities,  but  as  they  are  subservient  to 
Him  that  commands  them,  to  whom  alone  we  ought 
justly  to  offer  our  honour  and  thanksgiving."^  Now,  it 
is  to  be  observed  that,  in  the  above  passage,  the  minis- 
trative  office  of  intermediate  divinities  is  supposed  as 
hypothetically  possible  ;  but,  nevertheless,  the  great  law 
of  worship  is  restricted  to  God  alone;  much  more,  there- 
fore, when  Revelation  has  proved  the  falsehood  of  the 
hypothesis.  The  conduct  of  Abraham,  as  recorded  in 
Holy  Writ,  exactly  agrees  with  this  great  principle.  In 
the  book  of  Genesis  we  read  that  "  he  builded  an  altar 
unto  the  Lord,  and  called  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord."*^ 
In  no  place  do  we  find  a  trace  of  any  other  object  of  reli- 
gious homage.  The  distinctive  mark  of  Abraham's  faith 
was  not  more  his  belief  in  one  only  God,  than  in  his  re- 
stricting all  acts  of  worship  to  that  one  God  alone.  This 
was  his  visible  standing  testimony  against  the  worship 
of  intermediate  beings,  created  to  be  ministers  and  me- 
diators between  God  and  man.  And  so  Maimonides 
writes :  Abraham  "  began  to  teach  that  none  ought  to 
be  religiously  worshipped  save  only  the  God  of  the 
whole  world."  ^  In  like  manner,  the  patriarchal  families 
first,  and  the  people  of  Israel  afterwards,  served  as  visi- 

1)  Josephus,  lib.  i.  vii.  2)  Genesis  xii.  8 ;  xiii  4. 

3)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst.  p.  467. 


174        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

ble  witnesses  to  this  primary  law  of  the  true  worship  of 
God.  Their  whole  history  was  a  providential  education, 
framed  for  the  special  purpose  of  weaning  them  from  the 
Polytheism  of  the  Gentiles  to  the  unity  of  God.  To  this 
the  three  first  commandments  of  the  Law,  the  institution 
and  types  of  the  Tahernacle,  the  prohibition  to  have 
more  altars  than  one,  the  institution  of  one  temple  in 
Jerusalem,  were  all  directed.  But  it  is  needless  in  this 
treatise  to  enlarge  on  a  point  which  every  one  ever  so 
little  famiharwith  Holy  Writ  will  readily  remember.  It 
is  enough  to  refer  to  the  seductions  of  Balaam,  the  sins 
of  Solomon  and  Ahab,  and  of  the  later  kings  of  Judah,  to 
remind  us  that  the  transgression  which  brought  down 
God's  wrath  upon  His  people  was  the  abdication  of  their 
high  calling  to  testify  to  the  world  the  mystery  of  the 
Divine  Unity.  They  came  short  of  the  final  end  for 
which  they  were  elected  and  constituted  a  peculiar  peo- 
ple. Therefore  God  first  gave  them  over  to  the  neigh- 
bouring nations  for  chastisement,  and  finally  carried 
them  away  to  Babylon.  It  is  remarkable  that  from  that 
time  they  have  never  again  fallen  into  idolatry.  Their 
jealousy  for  the  great  mystery  of  the  Divine  Unity  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  notice  again  hereafter. 

The  witness  which  had  been  so  long,  and  with  such 
various  obscurations,  borne  by  the  Jewish  Church,  was 
taken  up  and  perfected  by  the  Christian.  We  may  treat 
this  witness  under  two  aspects,  the  one  testifying  to  the 
mystery  of  the  one  God,  the  other  to  the  incommunicable 
character  of  worship. 

The  testimony  of  the  Christian  Church  to  the  mystery 
of  the  one  God  runs  through  the  whole  body  of  the  New 
Testament  Scriptures  :  the  "  one  God  and  one  Mediator 
between  God  and  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus,"  may  be 
called  the  differentia  of  Christianity  as  compared  with 
all  approximations  to  true  religion.    And  as  we  find  this 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  175 

running  through  the  apostohc  writings,  so  we  find  it  as 
the  main  feature  of  the  primitive  history.  The  Baptismal 
formula  of  three  Persons  and  one  God,  and  the  Creed  as 
the  expansion  of  this  mystery,  is  the  rule  of  faith  and 
sacred  tradition  of  Christendom.  In  the  writmgs  of  St. 
Irenseus,  TertuHian,  and  others,  it  is  treated  as  equiva- 
lent to  the  whole  Gospel.  For,  indeed,  in  the  doctrines 
of  the  ever-blessed  Trinity  and  the  Incarnation  of  the 
Son  of  God,  all  truth  is  contained  by  axioms  and  corolla- 
ries :  *'  For  this  is  life  eternal,  to  know  Thee,  the  only 
true  God,  and  Jesus  Christ,  whom  Thou  hast  sent." 

Without  dwelling  longer  on  this  acknowledged  point, 
we  may  pass  on  to  the  second,  namely,  the  incommuni- 
cable nature  of  worship.  Perhaps  the  most  pregnant 
evidence  of  the  severe  faithfulness  with  which  the  early 
Church  restrained  every  form  of  worship  to  the  One  In- 
visible God  is,  the  charge  of  atheism  which  was  rife 
against  the  primitive  Christians.  The  martyrs  of  Christ 
are  represented  as  being  put  to  death  all  for  atheism. 
The  Christian  apologists  Athenagoras,  Justin  Martyr, 
Arnobius,  and  others,  reckon  atheism  among  the  charo-es 
brought  against  them  by  the  Heathen.  One  of  the  tests 
applied  to  Christians  was  an  abjuration  of  their  faith  in 
these  words,  "  Away  with  the  Atheists."'  The  cause  of 
all  this  was  partly  their  condemnation  of  Polytheism, 
and  partly  the  fact  of  their  not  permitting  in  their  places 
of  worship  any  visible  representations.  This  had  been 
the  characteristic  mark  of  the  Jews  before  them.^  That 
the  taint  of  creature-worship  from  time  to  time  fastened 
itself  upon  unstable  men  is  evident  from  frequent  expres- 

1)  Bingham,  Orig.  Eccl.  B.  i.  c.  ii.  3. 

2)  "  Nil  praeter  nubes  et  Coeli  numen  adorant." 

Juv.  xiv.  97. 
So  also  Tacitus — "  Judaei  mente  sola,  unumque  Numen  intelligunt — sum- 
mum  iilud  et  [aeternum,  neque  mutabile,  neque  interiturum :   igitur  nulla 
simulacra  urbibus  suis,  nedum  templis  sinunt."     Hist.  v.  5. 


176  THE    UNIT  if    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

sions  in  the  Fathers,  and  from  the  Council  of  Laodicaja,' 
which  was  compelled  to  make  a  canon  against  the  wor- 
shipping of  angels.  In  like  manner  the  Council  of  Eli- 
beris'^  framed  a  canon  prohibiting  all  pictures  of  the 
objects  of  worship,  lest  they  should  become  a  snare  to  the 
mind  of  the  worshipper  by  drawing  it  to  terminate  on 
them.  Another  convincing  proof  of  the  jealous  care  of 
the  Church  in  restricting  worship  to  the  one  only  God, 
may  be  shown  from  the  arguments  used  against  the 
Heathen  and  the  Arians.  By  the  former  they  were 
charged  with  worshipping  a  man  that  was  crucified.' 
They  did  not  deny  it,  but  justified  the  worship  by 
proving  that  he  was  God :  against  the  latter,  who  taught 
that  the  Son  of  God  was  a  creature,  they  answered 
that  they  (the  Arians)  were  thereby  worshippers  of  the 
creature  even  as  the  Heathen.*  The  acts  of  worship 
were  cited  by  them  in  proof  of  the  Godhead  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,^  the  axiom  being  unquestioned  that 
worship  is  an  exclusive  and  incommunicable  prerogative 
of  God.®  Neither  did  they  allow  of  subordinate  senses 
of  the  term.  Worship  with  them  was  an  idea  generi- 
cally  different  from  all  other  forms  of  reverence  or  vene- 
ration. It  was  not  the  idea  of  worshipping  inferior  be- 
ings as  the  one  God — an  error  into  which  not  even  the 
more  enlightened  Heathen  ever  fell — but  the  worship- 

1)  Concil.  Laod.  can.  xxxv.  apud  Bevereg.  Synod:   also  Theodoret  in 
Col.  ii.  18. 

2)  Concil.  Elib.  can  xxxvi.  Ed.  Albaspin. 

3)  Bingham,  Orig.  Eccl.  B.  i.  c.  ii.  xvi. 

4)  Cudvvoith,  Intell.  Syst.  pp.  627, 628. 

5)  Bingham,  Orig.  Eccl.  B.  xiii.  2. 

6)  "  All  worship  is  prerogative,  and  a  flower 

Of  His  rich  crown,  from  whom  lies  no  appeal 

At  the  last  hour. 
Therefore  we  dare  not  from  His  garland  steal 
To  make  a  posie  for  inferior  power." 

Herbert's  Poems — To  aM  Angels  and  Saints. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  177 

ping  them  at  all,  that  the  Church  condemned.'  They 
knew  no  distinction  between  worship  religious  or  not  re- 
ligious, supreme  or  subordinate  :  with  them  all  worship 
was  in  itself  religious  and  supreme.^  This,  then,  was 
the  great  canon  of  the  Church,  that  God  alone  is  to  be 
worshipped,  and  by  this  unity  of  worship,  through  the 
faith  and  sacraments,  she  has  ever  borne  her  witness  in 
the  world  to  the  true  knowledge  of  the  One  Supreme 
God. 

The  next  point  to  be  considered  is  in  what  manner 
the  objective  unity  which  consists  in  the  organic  system 
of  the  Church  subserves  the  end  of  manifesting  the  true 
knowledge  of  God  to  the  world. 

And,  first,  it  is  evident  that  the  "  oneliness'^  of  the 
Church — the  fact,  I  mean,  that  there  is  one  and  one  only 
visible  body,  endowed  with  divine  functions  and  preroga- 
tives— is  an  earthly  type  of  the  one  only  Divine  Being. 

The  Heathen  religions  were  manifold,  and  their 
churches,  if  we  may  so  call  the  congregations  of  the  ini- 
tiated, were  many.  The  Persians,  Egyptians,  Greeks, 
Romans,  Teutones,  though  they  had  some  common  basis, 
had  nevertheless  a  superstructure  of  Polytheism  so  vari- 
ous as  to  forbid  intercommunion  between  the  several 
sects.  By  the  necessity  of  an  ideal  law,  the  multiplicity 
of  gods  produced  a  multiplicity  of  rehgions.  Even  in 
the  same  nation,  and  between  neighbouring  cities,  the 
breaches  of  unity  were  many  and  irremediable.^  Poly- 
theism being  a  multiplicity  of  wills,  every  several  deity 
being  a  several  principle  of  volition,  separation  of  wor- 
ship and  division   of  worshippers  was  inevitable.     The 

1)  Origen  contra  Cels.  lib.  viii.  c.  26,  ed.  Ben. 

2)  It  i3  remarkable  that  the  Jews  and  Mahometans  charged  the  Chris- 
tians of  the  eighth  century  with  dishonouring  the  Unity  of  God  by  idolatry, 
and  the  worship  of  many  inferior  beings. 

3)  Juvenal,  xv.  1. 

9 


178        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

multitude  of  sects  was  the  expression  of  a  multitude  of 
objects  of  worship ;  and,  by  the  inverse  law,  the  oneli- 
ness  of  the  Church  is  the  image  of  the  One  only  God. 

But  in  the  next  place  we  may  find  a  further  and  deeper 
proof  of  the  unity  of  God  in  the  objective  organic  unity 
of  the  Church. 

As  in  the  natural  world  the  marks  of  design  bespeak 
an  inteUigent  Author,  and  the  unity  of  design  the  unity 
of  the  agent,  so  in  the  organic  system  of  the  Church. 

The  light  of  natural  reason  was  enough  to  show  to 
the  philosophic  Heathen  that  there  must  be  one  "  and 
one  only"  first  cause  of  all.  They  saw  that  two  first 
causes  would  impose  on  each  other  a  mutual  limitation  ; 
that  so  both  would  be  finite,  and  therefore  neither  could 
be  eternal.  To  the  eternity  of  any  being  they  saw  that 
infinity  is  absolutely  necessary :  they  saw,  therefore,  that 
the  cause  of  all  must  be  absolute  and  one  ;  and  that, 
therefore,  one  is  the  mystery  of  all  good  and  of  all  per- 
fection ;  that  one  is  the  number  which  measures  all  num- 
bers, but  is  itself  immeasurable.  The  force  of  reason, 
therefore,  compelled  them  into  an  acknowledgment  of  one 
Supreme  God.  But  they  sav/  also  the  image  of  the  Di- 
vine Unity  in  the  material  world  :  they  saw  the  laws  and 
powers  of  nature  at  unity  with  each  other  and  with  them- 
selves;^ and  some  believed  the  world  itseh'  to  be,  as  it 
were,  God — some  that  God  dwelt  in  it  as  life  in  a  mate- 
rial body — some  that  the  complex  unity  of  nature  was  a 
sensible  expression  of  the  mukiform  unity  of  the  Divine 
ideas.  We  have  already  seen  St,  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria arguing  that  "  whatsoever  is  most  highly  ]:>recious  is 
praised  in  respect  that  it  stands  alone,  being  a  likeness  of 
the  one  first  principle;"  and  that  the  transcendency  of 
the  Church,  like  the  principle  by  which  all  things  consist, 

1)  Cudworth,  Int.  Syst  pp.  372,  373  :  also  Galo's  Court  of  the  Gentiles, 
B.  3.  c.  9. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  179 

which  also  surpasses  all  other  things,  and  has  nothing 
like  or  equal  to  it,  is  in  its  unity.  So  he  says  again  : 
"  His  will  is  (His)  work,  and  is  named  the  world :  so  also 
His  desire  is  the  salvation  of  men,  and  is  called  the 
Church."^  And  in  another  place  he  says  the  Church  is 
"the  Divine  will  on  Earth  as  it  is  in  Heaven." 

It  is  plain,  then,  that  both  the  world  and  the  Church 
being  from  the  same  Author,  we  should  expect  to  find  a 
parallel  of  analogous  laws  ;  and  such,  indeed,  w^e  find 
pervading  the  constitution  of  both.  There  is  the  same 
unity  and  harmony — the  same  adaptation  of  means  to 
ends — the  same  principle  of  order  and  succession.  What 
the  laws  of  definite  proportion  are  in  the  natural  world, 
such  the  primitive  ordinances  of  God  are  in  His  Church  ; 
both  being  expressions  of  His  perfect  will,  arbitrary  in 
their  aspect  to  us,  but  hiding  a  mystery  of  wisdom,  and 
a  depth  of  purpose  immutably  true  and  right.  What 
the  law  of  form  and  structure  is  to  the  world  of  matter, 
such  is  the  organized  polity  of  God's  moral  creation — a 
polity  which  is  whole  in  all  its  members,  as  Nature  in 
her  most  perfect  forms  repeats  herself  in  every  part.  For 
instance :  the  lines  of  natural  descent,  and  the  relations 
of  subordination  and  equality,  are  types  of  the  succession 
of  Spiritual  Fathers,  and  of  the  fellowship  of  Brethren, 
through  the  mystery  of  our  second  birth.  In  like  man- 
ner w^e  find  certain  moral  characters  impressed  on  the 
animal  world,  and  no  one  can  doubt  that  the  instincts 
even  of  irrational  creatures  ought  to  be  comprehended 
under  this  moral  idea.  The  providence  of  the  ant,  the 
architectural  cunning  of  the  beaver,  the  mathematical 
skill  of  the  bee,  are  all  scintillations,  as  it  w^ere,  of  an 
higher  intelligence  ;  and  the  universal  sameness  of  these 
instincts  refers  them  all  alike  to  one  higher  Mind.  In  the 
same  manner,  in  each  reasonable  soul,  the  mystery  of 

1)  Poedag.  torn.  i.  114. 


180  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

conscience,  the  consciousness  of  right  and  wrong,  and  of 
the  moral  consequences  of  each,  the  idea  of  retributive 
and  distributive  justice,  the  first  foot-prints,  as  it  were,  of 
a  moral  Governor  pervading  all  His  responsible  crea- 
tures, plainly  mark  out  the  unity  of  their  Author  and 
their  Judge.  And  these  unerring  universal  types  of  His 
moral  law,  contrasted  with  the  infinite  variations  of  indi- 
vidual character,  and  with  the  ten  thousand  shades  of 
moral  diversity  which  lie  between  right  and  wrong,  so 
numerous  that  the  infinitely  diverse  countenances  of 
mankind  are  oftener  alike  than  their  infinitely  varying 
characters — this  contrast  of  one  universal  form  impressed 
alike  on  all  with  the  individual  types  which  all  so  vari- 
ously exhibit,  as  certainly  refers  that  which  is  uniform  to 
an  unity  of  will,  as  that  which  is  multiform  to  a  multitude 
of  volitions.  Wheresoever  there  is  no  higher  principle 
at  work  than  the  imperfect  will  of  man,  there  must  be  va- 
riance and  contradiction  :  harmony  and  unity  attest  the 
presence  and  will  of  God. 

And  as  from  the  unity  of  the  world  we  know  the  unity 
of  its  first  cause,  so  from  the  unity  of  its  operation  we 
know  the  unity  of  its  Ruler.  The  Divine  monarchy  is 
a  truth  which  even  Polytheists  could  not  overlook.  And 
this  monarchy  is  forced  into  the  light  of  our  reason  by 
the  visible  sameness  of  the  moral  government  of  the 
world.  As  the  moral  nature  of  individual  men  exhibits 
upon  it  the  traces  of  God's  law,  so  likewise  do  the  aggre- 
gates of  moral  beings,  whether  in  domestic  or  political 
society.  The  unity  of  political  justice  is  a  fact  which  the 
philosophers  and  orators  of  old  clearly  saw  and  reasoned 
on.^     They  saw  that  there  was  a  monarchy  over  moral 

1)  Est  quidem  vera  lex  recta  ratio,  naturae  congruens,  diffusa  in  omnes, 
constans,  sempitcrna:  qu33  vocet  ad  ofRcium  jubendo,  vetando  a  fraude  de- 
terreat,  qua?  tamen  neque  probos  frustrajubet  autvetat,  nee  improbos  jubendo 
aut  vetando  movet.    Huic  legi  nee  abrogari  fas  est,  nrque  derogari  ex  hac 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  181 

beings,  guiding  and  governing  their  manifold  and  entan- 
gled actions  ;  and  they  knew  that  this  simple  and  uner- 
ring procedure  was  the  express  law  and  order  of  one 
Supreme  Ruler.  The  monarchy  of  Providence  was  no 
less  distinctly  visible  than  the  monarchy  of  creation.  In 
like  manner,  by  the  same  process,  and  by  the  same  proofs, 
we  shall  find  the  monarchy  of  God  exhibited  in  the  econo- 
my of  redemption.  It  is  admitted  that  the  '■'■singularity'^'' 
or  "  oneliness^^  of  God's  Church  before  Christ's  comino-, 
and  the  unity  of  its  hierarchical  structure,  testified  to  the 
monarchy  of  God.  The  testimony  of  the  Church  Catho- 
lic is  to  the  same  point,  and  compels  assent  by  its  univer- 
sality. The  national  and  internal  unity  of  Israel  among 
the  multitude  of  nations  was  a  faint  proof  compared  with 
the  all-embracing,  all-absorbing  Church  of  Christ,  which 
takes  up  into  itself  all  nations,  languages,  people,  and 
tongues,  all  schools  and  philosophies,  all  codes  and  poli- 
ties, and  assimilates  and  blends  them  into  one.  The  tes- 
timony of  the  Church  Catholic  to  the  monarchy  of  God 
is  therefore  twofold :  first,  in  the  unity  of  its  organic 
structure  ;  and  next,  in  its  uniting  virtue. 

In  its  organic  sructure  we  find  the  miraculous  phe- 
nomenon of  a  body  of  moral  agents,  a  third  part  of  all 
mankind,  united  for  eighteen  hundred  years,  in  all  regions 
of  the  world,  under  one  definite  law,  and  in  one  definite 
polity.  The  same  proof  which  refers  to  God  the  same- 
ness of  universal  instincts,  and  to  man  the  diversity  of  po- 
litical system,  must  in  like  manner  solve  the  organic  unity 
of  the  Church  by  referring  it  to  the  one  ordaining  Mind. 

aliquid  licet,  neque  tota  abrogari  potest :  nee  vero  aut  per  Senatum  aut  per 
populum  solvi  hac  lege  possumus  ;  neque  est  quaerendus  explanator,  aut 
interpres  ejus  alius  ;  nee  erit  alia  lex  Romae,  alia  Athenis,  alia  nunc,  alia 
posthac ;  sed  et  omnes  gentes,  et  omni  tempore  una  lex  et  sempiterna  et 
immutabilis  continebit ;  unusque  erit  communis  quasi  magister  et  imperator 
omnium  Deus,  ille  legis  hujus  inventor,  disceptator,  lator. — Cic.  de  Repub- 
lica,  lib.  iii.  xxii. 


182         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

It  is  plainly  impossible,  on  the  same  laws  of  reasoning 
with  which  we  treat  other  phenomena  of  the  world,  to 
refer  the  organic  unity  of  the  Church  Catholic  to  any 
other  or  lesser  cause.  The  universal  law  of  succession, 
and  the  universal  rule  of  a  monarchical  episcopate,  abso- 
lutely demand  a  sole  and  uniform  cause ;  and  though  we 
are  now  speaking  chiefly  of  the  political  structure  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  we  may  not  omit  the  unity  of  the  Faith, 
of  the  moral  law,  and  of  the  Divine  worship.  No  consis- 
tent theory  has  ever  been  ventured  on  to  explain  the  unity 
of  the  Faith  on  an}^  principle  which  will  not  ultimately 
refer  it  to  the  unity  of  the  Divine  mind.  Whether  we 
acknowledge  the  Church  to  be  a  divinely  ordained  poli- 
ty, or  whether  we  suppose  it  to  be  no  more  than  the  re- 
sult of  a  concurrent  instinct  of  mankind,  will  matter  but 
little  in  this  view.  Either  way  its  unity  and  universality 
bespeak  the  unity  of  God.  If  Christianity  were  no  more 
than  an  instinct  pointing  to  the  world  unseen,  and  pre- 
paring for  a  future  state,  it  must  be  referred  for  its  author 
to  the  moral  Governor  of  the  world.  To  take  the  partic- 
ular features  of  this  one  great  fact:  we  find,  in  the  midst 
of  an  endless  variety  and  conflict  of  philosophical  theo- 
ries, an  objective  ideal  system  which  is  at  unity  with  it- 
self, spread  abroad  in  all  lands,  and  impressing  itself 
upon  minds  the  most  various  in  learning  and  power :  we 
find  also,  in  the  midst  of  unnumbered  discrepancies  of 
constituted  right,  a  system  of  preceptive  morality  univer- 
sally acknowledged  even  by  those  that  uphold  the  most 
various  economical  and  political  systems.^  We  find,  in 
the  midst  of  numberless  ways  of  adoring  and  propitiating 
the  multitude  of  unseen  beings,  one  form  of  worship,  har- 
monious even  in  the  minor  features  of  its  internal  order, 

1)  Neque  enim  quia  et  in  orbe  terrarum  plerumque  regna  dividuntur, 
ideo  et  unitas  Cliristiana  dividitur,  cum  in  utraque  parte  Catholica  inven- 
iatur  Ecclesia. — S.  Aug.  de  Unit.  Eccl.  xiii. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         183 

rising  up  and  binding  all  nations  into  one.  With  these 
facts  before  us,  T  say  it  is  impossible  to  conclude  other- 
wise than  that  the  diversities  of  philosophy,  morality,  and 
religion,  are  the  natural  offspring  of  the  reason,  the  con- 
science, and  the  imagination  of  man,  biassed  and  moulded 
by  the  manifold  energy  and  inclination  of  the  individual 
will,  and  that  the  unity  of  faith,  morality,  and  worship,  in 
the  Catholic  Church  is  the  stamp  of  the  one  Divine  intel- 
ligence upon  the  responsible  creatures  of  His  hand. 

And  because  ii  is  sometimes  attempted,  by  those  who 
reject  the  organic  polity,  to  resolve  the  unity  of  the  Cath- 
olic Church  into  an  unity  of  will  and  spirit,  it  is  worth 
while  to  observe,  that  with  Catholic  Christians  there  can 
be  no  question  whether  this  unity  of  will  and  spirit  be,  in 
fact,  contained  in  the  design  of  God.  About  this  there  is 
no  controversy ;  nay,  they  against  whom  it  is  wont  to  be 
objected  hold  and  urge  this  truth  even  more  strongly 
than  others.  The  question  is,  whether  there  be  not 
another  unity  subserving,  in  the  nature  of  means,  to  this 
great  end.  But  of  this  we  shall  speak  hereafter;  at  pre- 
sent we  have  to  observe — first,  that  they  who  labour  to 
prove  that  the  Church  Catholic  has  not  an  organic  unity, 
do,  in  fact,  break  down  one  argument  for  the  Divine 
monarchy,  no  less  than  they  who  should  deny  the  marks 
of  design  in  the  natural  world  by  teaching  the  fortuitous 
concurrence  of  atoms,  and  the  contingent  nature  of  all 
specific  forms.  The  visible  directness  of  this  parallel 
may  well  make  men  look  again  to  the  soundness  of  their 
reasoning :  for  it  is  certain  that  the  unity  of  God  is  not 
more  shown  in  the  uniform  structure  of  the  visible  world 
and  in  the  unity  of  the  Divine  operations  over  all  rational 
and  irrational  creatures,  than  in  the  objective  unity  of  the 
worship,  faith,  and  polity  of  the  Cliurch.  And,  upon  ex- 
amination, it  will  further  appear  that  this  great  law  of 
philosophical  reasoning  is  no  more  than  the  inductive 


184         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

process  contained  in  the  argument  from  universal  tradi- 
tion, or,  in  more  technical  words,  in  the  test  of  Vincent  of 
Lerins:  "  Q.uod  semper,  quod  ubique,  quod  ab  omnibus." 
Next,  that  their  ideal  principle  inclines  to  the  polytheis- 
tic :  for  they  that  held  many  inferior  deities,  held  also  a 
supreme  monarchy,  which  was  indeed  over  all.  but  was 
not  manifested  alike  in  all  parts  of  the  world ;  whence 
every  nation  became  a  Church  to  itself  with  infinite  lesser 
varieties,  but  still  holding  the  one  common  bond  of  a  su- 
preme worship.  And,  lastly,  this  mode  of  arguing  has 
an  affinity  to  that  of  the  Arian  and  Socinian  schools.  For 
those  who  deny  the  consubstantial  unity  of  three  Persons, 
explain  aw^ay  the  proofs  of  Holy  Scripture  into  unity  of 
mind  and  will ;  and  they  who  deny  the  organic  unity  of 
the  Church,  explain  away  all  passages  which  speak  of 
oneness  or  schism  into  a  mere  agreement  of  charity  and 
spirit. 

We  have  now  traced  out  the  relation  between  the 
outward  unity  of  the  Church  in  its  organic  system  and 
the  true  knowledge  of  the  unity  of  God :  we  may  there- 
fore go  on  to  see  how  the  inward  or  moral  unity  is  de- 
signed to  subserve  the  same  end. 

And,  first,  it  is  obvious  that  the  phenomenon  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  a  body  gathered  out  of  all  nations  into 
one  accordant  and  enduring  fellowship,  is  a  moral  mira- 
cle of  the  first  magnitude.  The  whole  history  of  the 
world  presents  a  series  of  empires  rising  and  falling, 
sometimes  crushed  by  the  weight  of  a  mightier  kingdom, 
and  sometimes  broken  up  from  within  by  the  force  of  in- 
ward collisions.  The  whole  history  of  each  several  em- 
pire— the  Assyrian,  the  Persian,  the  Greek,  and  the  Ro- 
man— is  little  more  than  a  baffled  endeavour  to  impose  a 
constraining  bond  of  unity  on  the  repugnancies  of  the 
moral  world.  Even  the  last  iron  despotism,  which  was 
stronger  than  all  before  it,  failed  in  the  task.    By  the 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  185 

might  of  fear  and  force,  it  held,  for  a  while,  in  awe  a 
larger  portion  of  mankind  than  any  empire  which  had 
gone  before  it.  But  at  the  very  heart  of  its  power  all  the 
most  direct  antagonists  of  unity  reigned  supreme.  The 
isolation  of  the  individual  will  was  universal ;  and  the  re- 
pulsive force  of  selfishness  was  ever  at  work  to  make  the 
isolation  still  more  complete.  The  conflict  of  kingdoms 
was  only  an  aggregate  expression  of  the  clash  of  indi- 
vidual wills.  That  such  was  the  condition  of  the  Hea- 
then world  is  known  to  all ;  and  that  the  first  phenome- 
non of  abiding  unity  appeared  in  the  Jewish  Church. 
There  was  a  something  which  even  the  Heathen  could 
not  but  acknowledge,  though  they  could  not  understand 
it.  But  the  full  display  of  unity  and  permanence  was  re- 
served for  the  Church  Catholic.  It  was  this  the  Prophet 
Daniel  wrote  of  when  he  said,  "In  the  days  of  these  kings 
shall  the  God  of  Heaven  set  up  a  kingdom,  which  shall 
never  be  destroyed."  Its  imperishableness  was  the  coun- 
ter-signature of  its  Divine  origin.  As  unity  is  an  attri- 
bute of  eternity,  so  is  it  the  cause  of  imperishableness. 
Mankind  stood  in  need  of  some  common  basis,  which 
should  be  one  and  the  same  in  all,  to  hold  in  check  the 
tendency  of  imperfect  natures  to  dissolution.  And  this 
was  the  function  of  the  Church. 

By  the  original  sin  of  man,  then,  there  was  called 
into  energy  a  repulsive  power,  which  sunders  the  moral 
nature  of  man  from  his  fellows.  Sin  has  a  direct  tenden- 
cy  not  only  to  repel  man  from  God,  but  man  from  his 
kind.  The  whole  race  tends  morally  to  isolation,  as  the 
dying  body  tends  to  the  dissolution  of  its  several  parts. 
Hence  comes  the  fall  of  kingdoms,  the  division  of  house- 
holds, and  the  inward  strife  of  man.  They  who  have 
made  a  state  of  nature  a  state  of  war,  have  erred  through 
the  darkness  of  their  natural  reason  ;  for  the  state  of  na- 
ture is  God's  ordinance,  and  has  in  it  the  relations  of  sub- 

0* 


186  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

ordination  and  equality,  and  in  its  result  is  order.  What 
half-sighted  philosophers  have  imagined  to  be  his  abori- 
ginal state,  is  but  the  perpetual  defeat  of  this  Divine  ordi- 
nance of  nature,  and  the  moral  repulsion  of  man's  indi- 
vidual will.  But  their  testimony  is  useful  to  our  purpose, 
as  showing  how  predominant  a  force  in  the  moral  world 
is  the  repelling  power  of  individual  wilfulness. 

The  function  of  the  Church,  therefore,  is  to  restore  to 
mankind  a  principle  of  moral  cohesion.  And  this  God 
has  been  pleased  to  do  by  taking  up  and  carrying  on  to 
perfection  His  own  original  ordinance.  The  moral  unity 
of  a  family  is  His  own  natural  work.  The  political  unity 
of  a  state  is  the  expansion  of  a  family.  In  the  moral  co- 
hesion of  the  Church  is  contained  both  these  forms  of  the 
one  principle,  perfected  and  spread  abroad  over  the  face 
of  the  world.  And  this  moral  power,  which  holds  to- 
gether elements  by  nature  so  repulsive,  is  a  miracle  as 
great  as  the  perpetual  sustaining  of  the  frame  of  creation, 
and  as  the  continuous  energy  of  the  Divine  will,  w^hich 
"  hangeth  the  world  upon  nothing."^  There  is  mani- 
.festly  a  superhuman  power  brooding  upon  man,  and 
raising  him  above  himself;  and  this  witness  for  the  Di- 
vine Unity  was  the  matter  of  our  Saviour's  prayer,  when 
He  asked  of  His  Father-,  in  behalf  of  His  Universal 
Church,  "  That  they  all  may  be  one,  as  Thou,  Father, 
art  in  me,  and  1  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us  ; 
that  the  world  may  believe  that  Thou  hast  sent  we.'" 
This  was  to  be  the  standing  miracle  in  proof  of  His  divine 
mission.  The  mutual  love  of  Christians  was  a  mystery 
related  even  to  that  of  the  Divine  nature.  It  was  even 
more  wonderful  to  the  world,  and  yet  it  was  undeniable. 
Any  form  of  speculative  truth  is  less  perplexing  to  the 
reason  of  man  than  the  moral  perfection  of  man's  nature 
to  his  stunned  and  selfish  heart:  the  conscious  enmity  of 

1)  Job  xxvi.  7.  2)   St.  John  xvii.  21. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  187 

an  evil  will  is  more  opposed  to  charity,  than  the  perplex- 
ity and  weakness  of  the  reason  to  any  transcendental 
mystery.  The  world  could  not  deny  the  visible  Unity  of 
the  Church :  but  "  the  light  shined  in  darkness,  and  the 
darkness  comprehended  it  not." 

The  first  great  expression  of  this  moral  unity  was  the 
common  worship,  and  the  intercommunion  of  all  Chris- 
tians and  all  Churches  in  the  one  universal  form  of  adora- 
tion. And  the  central  point  of  this  worship  was  the  Holy 
Eucharist.  But  besides  these  joints  and  bands  of  the 
great  miracle  of  charity,  the  Church  silently  testified  at 
all  times,  by  the  habitual  tenor  of  its  practice,  for  the  life 
of  every  Christian  man  was  a  type  of  the  unity  of  God. 
The  universal  love  of  all,  the  various  sympathy  in  joy 
and  sorrow,  the  denial  and  subjugation  of  self  for  the  sake 
of  others,  the  forgiveness  of  injuries,  the  quenching  of  re- 
sentment, the  love  of  enemies,  were  rays  emanating  from 
some  central  brightness.  Their  unearthliness  and  their 
inclination  revealed  their  advent  to  be  from  heaven,  and 
their  origin  to  be  in  God.  Now  we  find  the  early  writers 
pointedly  using  this  argument  to  confirm  the  mystery  of 
the  Divine  Unity;  and  also  the  mystery  of  the  Divine 
nature,  to  prove  the  duty  of  moral  Unity.  Of  the  latter 
St.  Cyprian  gives  an  example  :  "  The  Lord  says,  '  I  and 
the  Father  are  one.'  And  again,  concerning  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  it  is  written,  '  And  these  three  are 
one.'  And  does  any  man  beheve  that  this  unity,  which 
is  derived  from  the  steadfastness  of  the  Divine  nature,  and 
coheres  by  heavenly  sacraments,  may  be  rent  asunder  in 
the  Church,  and  separated  by  the  repulsion  of  clashing 
wills  ?  He  that  holds  not  this  unity,  holds  not  the  law  of 
God,  holds  not  the  faith  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  holds 
neither  life  nor  salvation."^ 

Of  the  other  form  of  the  argument  the  following  pas- 

1)  S.  Cypr.  de  Unit,  Eccl.  c.  2. 


188         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

sages  will  serve  as  examples.  St.  Athanasius,  in  rescu- 
ing out  of  the  hands  of  the  Arians  the  prayer  of  our  Lord, 
cited  above,  says,  "  He  did  not  say,  '  That  they  may  be 
one  as  we  are,'  meaning  that  we  should  be  made  such  as 
He  is  ;  but  that,  as  He,  the  Word,  is  in  His  own  Father, 
so  we  also,  having  received  a  certain  impress,  and  look- 
ing unto  Him,  may  become  one  with  each  other  in  una- 
nimity and  in  the  Unity  of  the  Spirit,  and  not  be  discord- 
ant as  were  the  Corinthians,  but  be  of  one  heart  as  were 
those  five  thousand  in  the  Acts,  who  were  all  as  one  per- 
son  We  being  of  one  kindred  with  each 

other  (for  we  are  all  begotten  from  one,  and  the  nature 
of  all  men  is  one)  become  one  with  each  other  in  the  dis- 
position (of  our  mind),  having  as  our  pattern  (or  arche- 
type) the  oneness  of  nature  which  is  between  the  Son 
and  the  Father."^  So  St.  Augustin,  speaking  of  the 
gathering  together  of  all  nations  into  one  to  serve  the 
Lord,  says,  "In  this  he  answered  him,  namely,  in  unity; 
for  whosoever  is  not  in  unity  answers  him  not.  For  He 
is  one.  The  Church  is  unity.  Nothing  answers  to  one 
but  unity.'"^  And  in  another  place,  writing  on  the  Holy 
Trinity,  he  says,  "  He  would  have  His  own  to  be  one,  in 
Himself',  because  in  themselves  they  cannot  be  one,  being 
severed  from  each  other  by  various  lusts  and  desires  and 
impurities  of  sin.  Wherefore  they  are  cleansed  by  the 
Mediator  that  they  may  be  one  in  Him,  not  only  by  that 
same  nature  through  which  all  are  made  of  mortal  men 
to  be  the  equals  of  angels,  but  also  through  the  same  and 
into  the  same  blessedness  which  conspires  with  a  perfect 
concord  of  will  into  one  spirit,  being  fused,  as  it  were,  by 
the  fire  of  charily.  This  is  the  intention  of  His  words, — 
'  That  they  may  be  one,  as  we  are  one.'  That  as  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  not  only  by  equality  of  substance, 

1)  P.  Athan.  Orat.  iii.  con:ra  Arian.  20.  erl,  Ben. 

2)  P,  Au?.  in  P«ai.  ci.  8. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  189 

but  by  will,  are  one,  so  also  they  between  whom  and  God 
the  Son  is  mediator,  not  only  for  that  they  are  of  the 
same  nature,  (i.e..  among  themselves.)  but  also  by  the 
same  fellowship  of  love,  may  be  one."^  St.  Cyril  of 
Alexandria,  in  his  Commentary  on  St.  John,  confuting 
the  error  of  the  Arians,  says,  on  the  same  text,  "  This  we 
shall  necessarily  repeat,  that  Christ,  assuming  the  unity 
of  substance  which  the  Father  hath  with  Him,  and  He 
with  the  Father,  as  an  image  or  type  of  the  unity  of  undi- 
vided love  and  agreement  of  mind,  which  is  perceptible 
in  the  union  of  soul,  would  mingle  us  together  as  it  were 
with  each  other,  by  the  virtue  of  the  holy  and  con-sub- 
stantial Trinity,  that  the  universal  body  of  the  Church 
maybe  perceived  to  be  one  by  the  coalition  and  concourse 
of  two  people  into  the  constitution  of  one  perfect  (body), 
which  grows  up  in  Christ."^  So  Theophylact,  who  may 
be  taken  as  representing  the  expositors  of  the  Greek 
Church,  says,  ""'That  the  world  may  believe  that  Thou 
hast  sent  me  ;'  forasmuch  as  by  the  concord  of  my  disci- 
ples it  shall  be  manifested  of  me  the  Teacher  that  I  am 
sent  from  God.  But  if  they  contend  with  one  another, 
men  will  not  say  that  they  are  the  disciples  of  the  Peace- 
maker." Then,  after  quoting  the  verse,  he  adds,  "  What 
glory  does  He  say  He  gave  them  ?  The  glory  of  mira- 
cles, of  doctrine,  of  teaching ;  and  that  other  glory  of 
unity  of  mind,  that  they  may  be  one.  For  this  glory  is 
greater  than  that  of  miracles.  For  as  we  adore  God 
with  wonder,  because  in  His  nature  there  is  neither  strife 
nor  conflict  and  this  is  the  greatest  glory,  so,  saith 
He,  let  them  be  conspicuous,  that  is  to  say,  by  rea- 
son of  their  unity  of  mind."^  These  passages  are  suffi- 
cient to  show  in  what  way  the  early  Christians  argued 
from  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  to  the  subjective  unity  of 

1)  De  Trinitate,  lib.  iv.  viii.        2)  S.  Cyril.  Alex,  in  Joan.  Ev.  lib.  xi.  11. 
^;  Theophyl.  in  loc. 


190  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  Church,  and  by  the  converse  :  the  one  form  exhibiting 
the  principle,  the  other  the  symbol ;  the  unity  of  the  God- 
head being  both  the  archetype  and  the  cause ;  the  unity 
of  the  Church  the  consequence  and  the  expression.  And 
this  will  be  sufficient  for  our  present  purpose. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  is  not  difficult  to  perceive 
the  ideal  relation  between  the  unity  of  the  Divine  nature 
and  the  unity  of  the  Church.  The  visible  phenomenon  is 
in  a  manifold  way  declaratory  of  the  invisible  mystery : 
as,  for  instance,  in  the  unity  of  its  doctrine,  which  ex- 
pressly teaches  the  oneness  of  the  Divine  nature  ;  in  the 
unity  of  its  worship,  which  is  uniform,  and  incommunica- 
ble, as  the  prerogative  of  God  alone ;  in  the  unity  of 
organic  structure,  which,  like  the  framework  of  the  uni- 
verse, bespeaks  one  causative  and  conserving  principle  ; 
in  the  unity  of  what  may  be  called  the  universal  laws, 
conditions,  instincts,  and  energies  of  the  Church,  as  those 
of  the  world  may  be  called  the  universal  ordinances,  de- 
posits, and  traditions  of  nature ;  and,  lastly,  in  the  sub- 
jective unity  of  mind  and  action,  which  has  no  type,  as  it 
can  have  no  cause,  but  in  God  Himself  In  all  these 
ways,  dogmatic,  organic,  energetic,  and  moral,  the  One 
Holy  Catholic  Church  is  the  earthly  witness  of  the  One 
Holy  Trinity,  God  over  all,  blessed  for  ever. 


R   III. 


THE    ITNITY    OF   THE    CHURCH — A    MEANS    TO    BESTOHE   MAN   TO    THE 
IMAGE    OF   GOD. 

We  may  now  proceed  to  the  next  point  which  is  to 
ascertain  in  what  way  the  Unity  of  the  Church  is  a 
means  of  the  restoration  of  man  to  the  image  of  God. 

And,  first  of  all,  we  must  take  into  the  present  chap- 
ter the  conclusion  of  the  last.  It  is  obvious  that  a  right 
knowledge  of  God  is  a  necessary  condition  of  the  restora- 
tion of  man  to  the  image  of  God.  And  we  have  already 
seen  how  the  Unity  of  the  Church  is  the  divinely  ordain- 
ed means  of  restoring  that  right  knowledge.  The  rea- 
son, however,  we  are  now  in  search  of  is  of  a  more  par- 
ticular and  proximate  kind. 

By  the  image  of  God  is  to  be  understood  that  holy 
state  in  which  man  was  created.  The  test  and  distin- 
guishing mark  of  this  state  was  the  unity  of  the  will  of 
man  with  the  will  of  God :  and  in  this  unity  is  potentially 
involved  what  was  never  actually  manifested,  namely, 
the  unity  of  every  several  will  with  the  wills  of  all  man- 
kind. 

By  the  disobedience  of  tlie  first  man,  or,  in  other 
words,  by  the  collision  of  his  will  with  the  will  of  God, 
these  unities  were  altogether  marred.     Every  man  born 


192  THE    UNITY    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

into  the  world  brought  with  him  into  life  a  several  will 
as  far  estranged  from  the  will  of  God  as  the  will  of  the 
first  who  fell.  The  multiplication  of  mankind,  there- 
fore, was  the  multiplication  of  disuniting  principles. 
Every  man,  as  he  is  severed  from  God,  is  severed  also 
from  his  fellows ;  and  holiness,  which  consists  in  love  to 
God  and  man,  in  submission  and  brotherhood,  was  mar- 
red in  its  principle,  and  became  impossible.  To  restore 
man  therefore  to  holiness,  it  was  necessary  to  restore  him 
to  the  moral  unities  which  are  its  conditions  and  security. 
As  these  moral  unities  were  the  divine  characters  of  the 
first  creation,  so  are  they  of  the  second — that  is,  of  the 
redemption  and  restoration  of  man.  It  is  evident  that 
the  Unity  of  the  Church  is,  as  it  were,  the  restored  unity 
of  the  primordial  creation.  It  is  the  will  of  God  re-im- 
pressing itself  as  at  the  first  upon  the  creatures  from 
which  it  had  been  erased.  And  such  is  the  uniform  lan- 
guage of  Holy  Scripture.  The  prophets  prophesied  of 
the  coming  redemption  as  a  power  which  should  purge 
natural  and  moral  evil  out  of  the  creatures  of  God,' 
which  should  heal  and  abolish  the  diseases  and  imper- 
fections of  man,^  and  spread  abroad  new  heavens  and  a 
new  earth. ^ 

The  mystery  of  our  Lord's  birth  teaches  us  the  same 
truth.  As  in  the  creation  God  made  the  first  Adam  of 
the  virgin  earth,  so  in  the  restoration  he  made  the  man- 
hood of  the  second  Adam  of  the  substance  of  a  virgin 
mother.  Either  was  respectively  the  first  principle  of  a 
creation ;  Adam  of  the  first,  Christ  of  the  second ;  St. 
Paul,  speaking  of  both  creation  and  redemption,  calls  our 
Lord  the  "  first  born  of  every  creature,"''  and  "  the  begin- 
ning :"^  again  he  says,  "  The  first  man  is  of  the  earth, 
earthy :  the  second  man  is  the  Lord  from  Heaven."^     In 

1)   Isaiah  xi.  G.  2)   Ibid,  xxxv,  C.  3)   Ibid.  Ixvi.  29. 

4)   Phil.  i.  15.  5)  lb.  18.  6)   1  Cor.  xv.  47. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  193 

the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  he  draws  the  parallel  further, 
showing  that  the  subjection  of  all  creatures  to  the  domin- 
ion of  Adam  was  typical  of  the  sovereignty  of  Christ  in 
the  second  creation.'  St.  John,  in  the  Apocalypse,  writes 
from  His  own  mouth  His  title,  "The  beginning  (ao/^, 
the  originating  principle)  of  the  creation  of  God."^  There- 
fore also  St.  Paul  declares  the  redemption  in  Christ  to  be 
"  a  gathering  together  again  "^  of  God's  creatures  "  under 
one  head  "  (ayay.f(fa).cuojai<;).  Our  Lord  himself  calls  it 
the  "regeneration;"^  and  the  being  made  partaker  in  it, 
being  "  born  again  ;"^  and  of  the  man  that  is  in  Christ, 
it  is  said  that  he  is  "  a  new  creature,  old  things  are  passed 
away,  all  things  are  become  new;^  and  that  we  are  look- 
ing for  "a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earih  wherein  dwell- 
eth  righteousness;"  and  he  that  sat  on  the  throne,  " from 
whose  face  the  earth  and  the  heavens  fled  away,  and 
there  was  found  no  place  for  them,"^  said,  "Behold  I 
make  all  things  new."^  It  would  be  easy  to  multiply 
almost  to  any  extent  passages  of  the  like  kind,  showing 
that  the  redemption  of  mankind  is  a  new  creation  from 
the  fallen  nature  of  the  old.  And  hence  it  is  evident  that 
the  law  of  unity  which  pervaded  the  first,  pervades  also 
the  second  creation  of  God.  And  the  Unity  of  the  Church, 
therefore,  is  in  very  deed  the  Unity  of  God's  primordial 
work ;  and  is  the  means  of  restoring  and  sustaining  in 
man  the  image  of  God  in  which  he  was  created. 

But  to  follow  out  this  inquiry  further,  it  may  first  be 
observed  that  by  the  Unity  of  the  Church  all  its  members 
are  gathered  under  one  Head,  who  is  the  exemplar  and 
type  of  all.  As  Adam  in  the  old  creation,  so  Christ  in 
the  new,  is  the  pattern  and  form  of  man.  The  types  of 
God's  image  are  not  many,  but  one  only.  He  is  "  the 
image  of  the  invisible  God."     And  the  oneness  of  the 

1)    Heb.  ii.  6—9.  2)   Rev.  iii.  14.  3)  Eph.  i.  10, 

4)   St.  Matth,  xix.  28.       5)  St.  John  iii.  3.  6)  2  Cor.  v.  17 

7)   Rev.  XX.  11.  8)  Rev.  xxi.  5. 


194  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

type  impresses  a  law  of  unity  on  the  body  of  those  that 
are  made  like  to  it.  The  Unity  of  the  Church  therefore 
is  the  representative  of  the  unity  of  this  image  ;  and  not 
the  representative  only,  but  the  result  and  consequence. 
Conformity  to  one  and  the  same  idea  is  unity  in  all  be- 
ings, how  many  soever  they  be.^  On  one  side  therefore 
the  unity  of  the  type  is  the  cause  of  unity  in  the  Church, 
which  is  the  hidden  unity  of  saints  in  virtue  of  conformity 
to  one  common  Lord.  But  in  another  sense  the  Unity  of 
the  Church  is  a  means  to  conform  mankind  to  the  one 
universal  type.  And  this  is  the  point  we  are  most  con- 
cerned with,  for  the  other  is  self-evident.  The  objective 
Unity  of  the  Church  is  a  means  of  restoring  mankind  to 
the  image  of  God,  first  by  gathering  all  men  into  one 
common  family.  "  Of  one  blood  he  made  all  nations  ;" 
but  they  became  severed  and  split  asunder  into  many. 
The  national  will  carried  out  and  multiplied,  the  disuniting 
forces  of  the  individual  will.  Nations  were  as  gigantic 
men.  Their  collective  distinctness  from  other  nations 
gave  them  a  sort  of  individual  being.  Every  nation 
had  its  own  type,  its  own  standard,  its  own  prescrip- 
tions, its  own  traditive  moralities,  its  own  sympathy 
and  antipathy.  It  was  a  great  moral  phenomenon  of 
accumulated  disunion,  instinct  with  a  life,  the  first  condi- 
tion of  which  was  an  energy  antagonist  to  all  other  na- 
tions. By  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church  all  these 
struggling  powers  were  gathered  and  held  in  one.  Man- 
kind became  once  more  an  individual  being.  The  one 
net  was  let  down  and  enclosed  a  great  multitude  of  all 
sons,  both  good  and  bad ;  but  with  all  their  internal  diver- 
sities they  were  still  but  one  draught.  The  absolute  one- 
ness of  mankind  in  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  and  the  unity  of 
all  in  one  common  type  from  which  all  were  in  the  begin- 
ning derived,  is  the  true  basis  of  unity  in  the  society  of 

1)   Orig.  in  Oseam,  tom.  iii.  p.  439.  ed.  Ben. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  195 

the  redeemed.  This  basis  the  Church,  by  binding  all  in 
one,  has  restored  to  the  world.  It  is  the  bond  of  unity 
among  the  families  of  man  ;  and  by  this  they  are  knit 
again  into  the  oneness  of  their  common  origin.  This 
then  is  the  first  ordering  and  disposing  of  mankind  to- 
wards the  recovery  of  the  one  common  type  and  image 
of  God. 

But,  in  the  next  place,  the  objective  unity  of  the 
Church  is  a  means  to  the  restoration  of  God's  image  to 
mankind,  by  superinducing  upon  the  famiHes  of  man, 
thus  knit  in  one,  a  common  rule  of  life,  and  a  common 
object  of  worship  and  imitation.  The  one  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  Christ  is  a  principle  of  oneness  and  assimila- 
tion, which  imposes  on  all  mankind,  how  divided  soever 
by  national  and  particular  diversities,  one  governing  and 
controlling  power.  The  one  Church,  having  its  seat 
upon  the  springs  of  man's  moral  nature,  checks  and  sus- 
pends the  antagonist  energies  of  individual  and  national 
will.  It  propagates  one  ideal  standard  of  human  perfec- 
tion, to  which  all  men  alike  tending  are  brought  into 
unity  with  themselves.  The  expansion  of  what  may  be 
called  the  natural  affections  of  the  Christian  family,  so 
that  the  members  of  Christ  shall  in  all  lands  find  father 
and  mother,  and  brethren  and  sisters ;  and  the  promised 
extinction  of  warfare  when  men  shall  turn  from  the  acts 
of  bloodshed  to  the  peaceful  tillage  of  God's  earth,  are 
dispositions  towards  the  moral  renovation  of  the  world, 
on  which  God's  image  shall  be  once  more  perfectly  im- 
pressed. The  unity  of  the  principle  of  regeneration 
through  "  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,"  works 
as  the  leaven  throughout  the  mighty  mass.  And,  as  St. 
Irengeus  says,  it  is  as  "  a  precious  deposit  of  the  Spirit  of 
God  in  an  excellent  vessel,  itself  ever  new,  and  ever  re- 
newing the  vessel  in  which  it  is.  For  this  gift  of  God  is 
intrusted  to  the  Church,  as  for  the  inspiration  of  His  crea- 


196  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

tures,  to  the  end  that  all  members  who  receive  it  may  be 
quickened  with  life." ^  It  is  everywhere  alike,  working 
by  one  heavenly  virtue,  and  conforming  the  spirits  of 
men  to  one  common  type.  In  like  manner  the  one  faith 
constrains  the  intellectual  energies  of  men  into  one  alti- 
tude of  homage  to  eternal  truth  5  and  the  one  organic 
polity  assimilates  the  moral  habits  of  all  nations  into  one 
order  and  inclination.  This  unity  of  mankind  is  in  itself 
a  part  of  the  Divine  image  in  which  man  was  created, 
of  which  one  leading  feature  is  intrinsic  unity. 

But  to  go  somewhat  further  into  detail.  It  is  evident 
that  the  restoration  of  the  image  of  God  to  man,  as  it  is 
a  moral  work,  must  needs  be  wrought  under  the  condi- 
tions which  control  man's  moral  nature. 

There  is  needed,  therefore,  first  of  all,  a  system  which 
shall  truly  present  to  the  reason  and  conscience  of  man  a 
knowledge  of  the  Divine  image.  From  what  has  been 
said  in  the  last  chapter  it  is  evident  that  the  unity  of  the 
Divine  mind  is  expressed  by  the  unity  of  all  His  works ; 
and  among  them  all,  especially  by  the  unity  of  that  which 
is  His  latest  and  most  perfect  work,  the  Church.  It  is 
certainly  hard  to  conceive  that  the  knowledge  of  this 
unity  could  be  propagated  throughout  the  world  by  a 
number  of  distinct  bodies :  or,  if  for  once  propagated, 
that  the  knowledge  could  be  preserved  and  handed  on. 
The  history  of  the  old  religions,  and  of  the  philosophic 
sects,  the  series  and  mutations  of  schools,  are  enough  to 
show  that  in  multiplicity  there  is  always  diversity.  At 
the  beginning  they  were  diverse  from  each  other,  having 
no  principle  of  agreement:  in  the  end  they  were  diverse 
from  themselves,  having  no  principle  of  transmission. 
The  isolated  tradition  of  particular  sects,  schools,  na- 
tions, churches,  has  never  been  known  to  hold  its  identity 
from  first  to  last.     They  have  each  one  forfeited  some- 

1)  S.  Iren.  lib.  iii.  xxiv. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  197 

what,  and  some  have  forfeited  nearly  all  of  the  Divine 
type  they  were  founded  to  convey.  Nothing  but  a  mul- 
tiplicity of  members  organically  one  has  ever  yet  pre- 
served whole  and  unchanged  its  deposit  of  truth.  The 
consent  of  the  Church  Catholic  has  done  so.  The  unity 
of  the  Church,  therefore,  is  a  necessary  condition  to  the 
preservation  of  that  knowledge  of  the  Divine  mind  which 
is  a  necessary  condition  to  man's  restoration  to  the  Di- 
vine image.  But,  to  pursue  this  further,  it  may  be  added, 
that  the  one  type  of  man's  perfect  nature  to  which  all 
must  be  conformed,  namely,  the  image  of  Jesus  Christ, 
contains  in  itself  the  complete  idea  of  moral  unity.  It 
exhibits  the  nature  of  man  under  the  two  aspects  of  its 
perfection  in  the  unity  of  obedience  to  the  will  of  God, 
and  in  the  unity  of  charity  with  mankind ;  and,  for  the 
exhibition  of  this  perfect  example  to  the  world,  God  has 
been  pleased  to  guide  His  chosen  servants  both  in  their 
words  and  acts.  It  is  not  to  be  conceived  that  He  should 
guide  them  in  the  use  of  language,  and  leave  them  with- 
out guidance  in  the  determination  of  their  actions  ;  for  it 
is  by  positive  and  visible  institutions,  not  less  than  by 
words  and  parables,  that  the  truth  is  bodied  forth.  It  is 
evident  that,  as  some  words  more  truly  than  others  ex- 
press the  mystery  of  Christ's  perfect  manhood,  so  do 
some  symbolical  institutions.  And,  as  we  must  believe 
that,  of  all  symbolical  institutions  by  which  this  mystery 
could  be  expressed,  the  most  exact  and  expressive  would 
be  chosen,  so  we  must  believe  that  the  same  would  be 
ordained  as  the  universal  symbol  and  expression  of  the 
universal  type.  It  stands  to  reason,  therefore,  that,  as 
Christ  is  the  express  image  of  God  in  man's  nature,  so 
the  body,  which  on  earth  is  ordained  to  represent  and 
transmit  the  exact  knowledge  of  that  one  exemplar,  must 
be  itself  perfectly  framed,  and  adapted  for  its  represent- 
ative office ;  and  as  what  is  perfect  is  one,  therefore  its 
leading  feature  must  be  unity  of  constitution.     The  Uni- 


198  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

ty  of  the  Church,  therefore,  is  a  foremost  condition  to  the 
exact  representation  and  faithful  transmission  of  the  type 
of  the  image  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  mankind 
must  be  conformed. 

Hitherto  I  have  spoken  of  the  Church  only  as  a  mode 
of  expressing  and  preserving  a  knowledge  of  the  Divine 
image;  we  must  next  regard  it  as  a  means  of  impress- 
ing it  upon  mankind,  and  as  a  discipline  through  which 
the  moral  nature  of  man  is  trained  and  likened  to  the 
image  of  God. 

We  have  in  part  forestalled  this  topic,  in  speaking  of 
the  unity  which  is  superinduced  upon  the  nations  of  the 
world  by  the  imposition  of  a  common  bond  and  rule  of 
hfe.  But  we  may  now  go  more  fully  into  particulars, 
and  trace  out  the  relation  between  the  organic  Unity  of 
the  Church  and  the  discipline  of  the  moral  nature  in  each 
several  man. 

The  perfection  of  man's  nature  consisting  in  the  unity 
of  his  will  with  the  vv^ill  of  God  and  with  the  wills  of  his 
fellow-men,  it  is  evident  that  the  moral  discipline,  be  it 
what  it  may,  by  which  he  must  be  reduced  to  this  two- 
fold unity,  must  be  so  framed  as  to  bear  upon  his  moral 
nature  on  these  two  sides  of  it.  Now  we  have  already 
seen  that  the  two  relations  which  constitute  the  unity  of 
the  Church  are  those  of  subordination  and  equality;  of 
subordination  to  an  authority  standing  in  the  place  of 
God,  and  of  equality  with  all  who  are  in  like  manner 
gathered  into  one.  The  first  relation,  that  of  subordina- 
tion to  an  authority  ordained  of  God,  is  a  moral  correc- 
tive of  the  rebellious  energies  of  the  will  by  which  in  the 
beginning  it  revolted  against  God.  Pride,  self-trust,  im- 
patience of  control,  hankering  after  things  forbidden,  and 
all  the  manifold  lower  forms  of  these  several  sins,  are 
met  by  a  power  of  direct  repression  in  the  authority 
which  God  has  ordained  in  His  Church.  God  requires 
of  us  a  renunciation  of  self-will,  and  He  has  therefore 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  199 

constituted  an  order  which  shall  bear  rule  over  His  peo- 
ple, and  shall  bring  them  under  the  yoke  of  obedience  to 
Himself.  And  in  this  is  our  chief  conformity  to  the  ex- 
ample of  Christ,  whose  obedience  on  earth  was  opened 
with  "Lo,  I  come  to  do  thy  will,  O  God;"  and  closed 
with  "  Not  my  will,  but  thine,  be  done." 

In  like  manner  also  the  second  relation,  of  equality,  is 
a  moral  corrective  of  the  evil  motions  which  propagate 
sin  and  strife.  The  love  of  precedence,  the  lust  for  the 
highest  place  and  the  largest  share,  and  the  sins  of  ibrce 
and  fraud  which  minister  to  pride  and  covetousness,  are 
directly  encountered  and  repressed  by  the  claims  and 
duties  of  equality.  The  habits  and  energies  of  mind  de- 
manded and  disciplined  by  this  relation  are  those  that 
constitute  one  of  the  highest  degrees  of  likeness  to  the 
example  of  Christ,  and  therefore  to  the  image  of  God. 
Lowhness,  meekness,  long-suffering,  forbearance  one  of 
another,  and  charity,'  are  the  graces  which  are  quickened 
and  trained  in  the  discipline  of  the  one  body  :  in  it  every 
form  of  self-denial  is  fostered  and  perfected  after  the 
example  of  Christ,  who  said,  "  If  I  your  Lord  and  master 
have  washed  your  feet,  ye  ought  also  to  wash  one 
another's  feet."^ 

There  is,  then,  an  express  adaptation  of  the  organic 
unity  of  the  Church  to  the  nature  of  fallen  man,  an 
adaptation  so  designed  by  the  wisdom  of  Him  who  made 
mankind,  that  it  acts  as  a  direct  and  searching  corrective 
of  the  chief  faults  of  his  moral  being.  It  meets  him  at 
the  two  points  at  which  he  is  ever  departing  from  the 
perfect  law  of  his  nature,  and  from  the  image  of  God :  it 
meets  him,  and  checks,  and  throws  him  in  upon  himself, 
and,  by  a  continuous  discipline,  keeps  up  the  conscious 
effort  to  renounce  and  to  deny  the  self-will  of  his  isolated 
nature.    From  childhood  to  old  age,  through  all  the  stages 

1)  Eph.  iv.  2,  3,  4.  2)   St.  John  xiii.  14. 


200        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

and  seasons  of  life,  intermingling  with  all  toils  and 
pleasures  in  the  throng  of  his  fellow-men,  and  in  soUtude 
with  God,  the  unity  of  the  Church  bears  steadily  down 
upon  his  individual  will,  reducing  it  to  the  bent  and  pos- 
ture of  its  original  unity  with  God  and  man. 

Now  it  must  be  observed,  farther,  that  the  perfection 
of  this  moral  discipline  lies  not  more  in  its  intrinsic  nature 
than  in  the  sanction  by  which  it  is  ordained.  It  might  be 
thought  that  the  voluntary  submission  of  the  will  to 
Pastors  chosen  and  acknowledged  by  the  body  of  the 
Church,  or  by  the  individual  man,  and  the  mutual  for- 
bearance of  members  combined  in  a  voluntary  society, 
would  not  only  work  out  the  same,  but  cause  a  more  per- 
fect moral  discipline,  inasmuch  as  under  both  aspects  it 
would  be  a  voluntary  submission  and  forbearance.  But 
it  is  this  which,  in  fact,  vitiates  the  whole.  In  any  form 
of  Christian  community,  except  only  the  one  Church,  the 
basis  of  unity  is  the  choice  of  the  individual  will.  The 
very  idea  of  submission  and  forbearance,  chosen  by  the 
individual  will,  implies  its  correlatives  of  personal  inde- 
pendence and  active  selfishness  as  objects  which  might 
equally  be  chosen.  To  make  the  better  choice  may  be 
an  act  of  the  individual  will,  as  full  of  self-trust  and  self- 
determination  as  the  sin  of  Adam.  The  sanction  of 
Catholic  unity  is  the  will  of  God  ;  it  is  a  Divine  discipline, 
and  the  submission  and  the  equality  exacted  by  it  are 
exacted  of  all  men  alike,  both  wilhng  and  unwilling,  in 
the  name  of  God.  No  man  may  choose  whether  or  no 
he  will  be  a  son  of  God,  and  a  brother  of  Christ.  This 
God  has  resolved,  by  the  fiat  of  His  Divine  will,  in  electing 
us  to  the  gift  of  regeneration  in  the  unity  of  His  Church. 
The  same  argument  may  be  applied,  therefore,  to  every 
form  of  unity,  how  nearly  soever  it  may  approach  the  true, 
ifit  fall  short  never  so  httle;  for  that  falling  short,  be  it  only 
in  things  which  men  call  indifferent,  forfeits  the  direct 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        201 

sanction  of  God.  He  is  not  its  author ;  and  though,  in 
His  merciful  providence,  He  may  become  in  some  sense  its 
administrator,  even  as  He  is  of  all  things,  how  imperfect 
soever  they  be,  which  tend  towards  the  good  of  his  crea- 
tures, yet  there  are  visible  tokens  to  be  seen  upon  all 
communities  of  Christians,  whether  congregated  by  a 
conscious  choice,  or  holding  together  in  a  lingering  sem- 
blance of  unity  after  the  true  bond  of  unity  is  broken, 
witnessing  plainly,  by  the  imperfect  character  of  the  re- 
sults, that  they  are  not  the  divinely  appointed  means  of 
restoring  man  to  the  image  of  God.  They  have,  for  the 
most  part,  lost  somewhat  of  the  objective  type — somewhat 
of  the  mystery  of  the  perfection  of  man's  nature  in  the 
manhood  of  Jesus  Christ;  or,  if  they  have  retained  a 
formal  aclmowledgment  of  the  truth,  they  have  lost  the 
moral  perception  of  its  meaning.  When  the  subjective 
habit  of  faith  has  grown  slack  in  themselves,  and  the 
spiritual  perceptions  of  the  mind  blunted,  they  must  sink 
back  upon  a  lower  level.  Their  highest  types  of  char- 
acter will  be  defective  in  the  master-features  of  Christ's 
likeness.  Among  those  that  are  severed  from  the  unity  of 
the  Church  may  often  be  found  a  rigid  morality,  but  little 
of  the  unearthly  temper  which  marks  the  Catholic  Saints. 
We  often  see  strict  truth,  integrity,  and  benevolence,  but 
little  of  the  conscious  awe  of  God's  invisible  presence,  the 
subjugation  of  passion,  and  denial  of  self,  which  distin- 
guishes a  Saint  from  a  Philosophic  Moralist.  We  shall 
often  see,  likewise,  much  zeal,  forwardness,  and  energy 
in  action,  but  little  of  the  meekness,  self-withdrawal,  and 
devout  humility  which  is  the  crowning  glory  of  Christ's 
example.  In  fact,  out  of  tlie  unity  of  the  Church  w^e  see 
the  commoner  virtues,  which  the  world  in  part  knew 
before  Christ's  coming,  carried  higher  by  the  strength 
of  Christianity  ;  but  of  the  higher  graces,  which  the  world 
never  dreamed  of,  and  which  were  manifested  in  Christ 

10 


202        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

only,  we  can  trace  but  faint  lines  anywhere  except  in  the 
one  Church  alone.  The  reason  of  this  seems  evident. 
In  no  other  body  is  there  the  divinely-adjusted  discipline 
for  the  will  of  man.  The  plastic  energy  by  which  the 
character  of  Christ  is  remoulded  in  the  moral  nature  is 
baffled  for  want  of  the  organic  structure  through  which 
the  fitness  and  harmony  of  moral  truth  prescribe  its 
action ;  just  as  the  animal  life  fails  of  throwing  out  the 
highest  forms  of  health  where  the  bodily  organization  is 
maimed  or  wanting.  We  see,  then,  the  example  of  our 
blessed  Lord  himself  exhibited  under  the  twofold  aspect 
already  spoken  of:  He  stood  between  His  Father  and 
His  brethren ;  to  Him  he  was  subordinate  in  all  the 
powers  of  His  will ;  for  their  sakes  He  denied  Himself 
in  all  the  sinless  promptings  of  our  manhood.  So  in  like 
manner  the  pastors  of  His  Church  stand  between  Him 
and  their  flock.  To  Him  they  are  subject  in  all  the  work- 
ings of  the  heart  and  will ;  for  their  flocks'  sake  they  re- 
nounce their  own  desires,  and  choice,  and  self  And  in 
like  manner  every  member  of  the  Church  Catholic  is 
placed  between  his  Lord  in  heaven  and  his  fellow-men  on 
earth;  and  in  the  particular  Church  where  the  gift  of  re- 
generation has  assigned  his  lot,  between  his  pastor  and  his 
brethren.  The  same  twofold  relation  is  to  be  traced  in 
all  these  several  forms  of  discipline.  The  moral  nature 
of  man  is  under  the  same  conditions  in  all,  and  the  result- 
ing character  is  therefore  alike.  And  this  will  explain 
why  in  the  Church  Catholic  the  traditionary  type  of  char- 
acter is  the  most  perfect  of  all ;  because,  with  the  exact 
transmission  of  the  true  objective  idea,  the  subjective 
habit  of  the  Church  is  ever  sustained  at  a  point  of  ap- 
proximation which  ensures  a  purer  and  truer  perception 
of  its  moral  completeness.  The  one  perfect  type  is,  if  I 
may  so  say,  connatural  to  the  one  body  of  Christ ;  and 
the  whole  lineage  of  Catholic  saints  will  evince  this  truth. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  203 

Their  universal  likeness  each  to  ail  the  rest,  and  all  to 
their  one  exemplar,  is  an  after-proof  of  exceeding 
strength,  attesting  the  perfect  design  of  the  one  great 
Lawgiver,  who  hath  so  framed  His  Church  as  to  mould 
the  moral  elements  of  man  into  one  predestinated  form, 
conforming  them  "  to  the  image  of  His  Son,  that  He 
might  be  the  first-born  among  many  brethren."^  To 
bring  out  this  great  mystery  more  clearly,  we  may  take 
a  parallel,  such  as  St.  Ignatius  and  St.  Cyprian,  both 
branded  by  the  gainsayers  of  organic  unity  as  rigid  stick- 
lers for  forms  and  external  systems,  as  credulous  or  am- 
bitious monarchists  in  Church  government.  No  two 
saints  of  old  are  more  identified  with  the  particular  kind 
of  unity  we  are  now  speaking  of.  In  ecclesiastical  his- 
tory, and  in  religious  controversy,  they  are  the  main  points 
of  rally  and  assault.  One  in  the  East,  the  other  in  the 
West,  nearly  two  hundred  years  apart  in  age,  unlike  in 
every  other  circumstance  and  condition  of  life ;  but  one 
in  the  unity  of  Christ's  Church  ;  one  in  rule  of  faith,  and 
habit  of  obedience ;  one  in  likeness  to  each  other,  and  to 
their  common  type  ;  like  in  obedience  and  in  charity,  in 
the  bent  and  temper  of  the  mind,  in  the  active  and  pass- 
ive graces  of  Christ's  likeness;  one  in  saindiness  and  in 
martyrdom.  Where  shall  we  find  such  a  parallel  be- 
tween any  two  Christians  severed  from  the  unity  of  the 
Church?  Or  to  take  another  parallel  in  St.  Athanasius 
and  St.  Augustin,  the  great  teachers  and  bishops  of  Alex- 
andria and  of  Hippo.  These  come  nearer  to  ourselves 
in  the  character  of  their  life.  They  were  neither  of  them 
martyrs.  Their  life  was  made  up  of  common  events.  It 
was  uncommon  only  in  the  measure  of  earnest,  endless 
striving  for  truth,  which  was  day  by  day  crucified  afresh 
before  their  eyes.  They  were,  as  the  world  judges, 
stubborn  controversialists.    Athanasius  contended  half  a 

1)  Rom.  viii.  29. 


204         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

century  about  an  iota,  and  Augustin  half  his  life  for  what 
men  now  call  an  external  form  or  accident.  He  declares 
with  his  own  mouth  that  in  the  faith  and  sacraments  of 
Christ  the  Donatists  were  as  right  as  himself.  But  these 
saints  were  contending  in  defence  of  an  objective  sys- 
tem vital  to  the  work  of  God  in  man.  Each  through  a  long 
life,  St.  Athanasius  to  nearly  eighty  years,  St.  Augustin  to 
seventy -six,  prayed,  fasted,  catechised,  taught,  wrote,  dis- 
puted in  conference  and  in  synod,  enduring  the  cross  for 
the  Church  of  Christ.  They  were  shadows  of  their  Master, 
striving  to  win  a  gainsaying  world  to  wisdom.  "In 
Athanasius  there  was  nothing  observed  throughout  the 
course  of  that  long  tragedy  other  than  such  as  very  well 
became  a  wise  man  to  do  and  a  righteous  to  suffer.  So 
that  this  was  the  plain  condition  of  those  times  ;  the  whole 
world  was  against  Athanasius,  and  Athanasius  against  it : 
half  an  hundred  of  years  spent  in  doubtful  trial  which  of 
the  two  in  the  end  would  prevail,  the  side  which  had  all, 
or  else  the  part  wdiich  had  no  friend  but  God  and  death — 
the  one  a  defender  of  his  innocency,  the  other  a  finisher 
of  all  his  troubles."  ^  Augustin  for  forty  years  contended 
against  the  falsehood  and  violence  of  a  throng  of  heretics. 
On  him,  in  Africa,  fell  the  unbroken  assault  of  Mani- 
chfeans,  Donatists,  Circumcellians,  Pelagians,  Arians, 
and  Heathen :  he  lived  to  see  his  country  swept  over 
by  invading  armies  ;  and  in  his  old  age,  when  shut  up 
in  Hippo  by  the  legions  of  the  Vandals,  prayed  that  God 
would  either  save  his  city  from  the  siege,  or  release  him 
from  this  troubled  life  :  when  God,  it  seems,  knowing 
that  the  last  light  of  the  African  Church  was  flickering, 
heard  the  latter  prayer,  and  in  the  third  month  of  the 
siege  took  him  to  his  reward ;  and  so  he  died  even  as  he 
had  lived,  shut  up  in  the  midst  of  troubles.  Now,  in  these 
two  great  saints  there  was  one  only  character.     Though 

J)   Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  B.  v.  xlii. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  205 

variously  tried,  there  was  one  principle  and  attitude  of 
mind.  They  intensely  contemplated  one  and  the  same 
divine  idea;  and  by  gazing  they  grew  into  its  likeness. 
They  were  moulded  by  the  continuous  pressure  of  the 
same  discipline,  conforming  them  to  the  same  exemplar: 
in  themselves  they  had  the  subordinate  features  of  in- 
dividual character,  but  in  Christ  they  were  as  a  twofold 
reflection  of  the  same  image  cast  on  either  side. 

But  there  is  also  a  further  reason.  The  objective 
unity  of  the  Church  is  a  means  to  the  restoration  of  man 
to  the  image  of  God,  not  only  because  it  most  truly  ex- 
presses and  transmits  that  one  Divine  image  in  the  ex- 
ample of  Christ,  and  because,  through  grace,  it  conforms 
the  moral  nature  of  man  by  a  continual  discipline  into 
the  likeness  of  that  same  image  which  it  expresses,  but 
because,  by  a  deeper  and  more  inward  process,  it  acts 
upon  the  moral  nature  of  man  and  reduces  it  to  an  inward 
unity  with  itself.  The  unity  of  the  Godhead,  as  it  is  the 
principle,  so  it  is  the  law  of  all  subordinate  beings.  They 
are,  as  their  first  cause  is,  each  several  one  an  unity. 
Now  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  is  twofold.  The  first,  as 
we  have  said,  is  in  the  fact  that  besides  Him  there  is 
none  other  God.  Tlie  second  is  the  oneness,  or  integ- 
rity, or  wholeness,  in  which  consists  perfection ;  as  the 
unity  of  the  three  Persons  in  the  ever-blessed  Trinity. 

In  like  manner,  every  several  moral  being  is  one. 
Each  one  is  as  it  were  a  shadow  cast  from  the  Divine 
Unity,  or  a  finite  light  kindled  from  the  infinite  fount  of 
light.  The  multitude  of  beings  is  no  more  than  a  repe- 
tition of  unity ;  the  finite  for  the  infinite.  In  this  consists 
the  unity  of  individual  consciousness.  As  the  Eternal 
spake,  saying,  "  I  am,"  so  He  has  given  to  every  moral 
being  to  be  a  shadow  of  His  own  incommunicable  exist- 
ence. We  are  ourselves,  and  not  another.  No  other  is 
partaker  of  our  individual  consciousness;    of  our  living 


206        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

unity.  On  this  finite  symbol  of  Himself  God  impressed 
His  own  image;  and  man  became  a  reason,  a  moral 
judge,  a  responsible  agent,  or,  in  one  word,  a  will.  In 
this  is  the  lighi  of  the  Divine  Unity  reflected  with  the 
directest  ray.  Every  several  being  is  a  self-ruling  prin- 
ciple of  moral  action.  What  God  is  to  the  creation  and 
course  of  the  world,  each  several  man  is  to  the  work  of 
his  hands,  and  the  government  of  his  living  powers. 

It  must  be  further  considered,  that,  as  the  Divine  im- 
age has  an  intrinsic  unity  of  nature,  so  in  its  impression 
upon  man  is  the  same  unity  transmitted.  We  do  but 
speak  at  random  when  we  go  beyond  what  God  has  spok- 
en of  Himself;  but  we  may,  nevertheless,  contemplate 
goodness,  wisdom,  and  power,  as  the  confluent  attributes 
of  one  Being,  and  the  confluent  energies  of  one  will. 
We  may  conceive  how  God  is  a  law  unto  Himself;  how 
the  subjective  goodness  and  wisdom  of  God  are  the  ob- 
jective good  and  true,  which  are  co-eternal  with  the  will 
of  God;  and  thus  how  there  is  in  every  Divine  energy 
an  harmonious  intercommunication  of  all  moral  characters 
which  inhere  in  the  one  eternal  Being. 

In  like  manner,  in  the  soul  of  man  God  impressed  His 
own  intrinsic  unity.  His  moral  and  intellectual  natures, 
the  one  enlightened  by  wisdom,  the  other  instinct  with 
goodness,  and  the  will,  issuing  forth  in  harmony  with 
both,  make  up  the  full  stamp  of  the  archetypal  seal, 
which  is  the  image  or  character  of  God.^  The  spiritual 
being  of  man  thus  coalesced  into  one  absolute  whole. 
The  whole  man  partook  altogether  of  every  act.  As  by 
the  unity  of  energy  and  sensation  the  whole  body  par- 
takes in  every  act  and  passion,  so  the  whole  inner  nature, 
by  supremacy'^  and  subordination,  intercommunication 


1 )  Cudworth's  Immutable  Moral,  p.  36. 

2)  Butler's  Seimons  on  Human  Nature,  Serm.  ii. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  207 


and  correspondence  of  parts  and  functions,  thought,  felt, 
and  spoke,  and  acted  as  one  indivisible  whole.  The  wili 
in  the  moral  reason  ruled  supreme  over  all  affections  and 
passions  of  man.  There  was  the  unity  of  a  spiritual 
monarchy,  with  internal  order  and  spontaneous  obedi- 
ence. He  was  even  as  God,  a  law  unto  himself  He 
had  one  will,  coincident  with  the  will  of  God.  It  stream- 
ed forth  in  one  right  line  between  the  parallel  currents  of 
wisdom  and  goodness.  The  sin  of  man  began  and  ended 
in  a  breach  of  this  intrinsic  unity.  The  revolt  of  his 
lower  passions  dethroned  the  rational  and  moral  will,  and 
usurped  each  one  a  share  in  the  principle  of  volition. 
"  When  a  man,  who  is  a  unity,  (monad,)  sins,  he  be- 
comes manifold,  being  abscinded  from  God,  and  severed 
into  parts  through  falling  from  his  own  oneness."^  His 
one  will  becomes  a  multiplicity  of  wills,  as  a  flame,  beaten 
down  in  its  ascent,  is  severed  into  many  flames,  and  turns 
everyway ;  so  the  will  of  man,  averted  from  God,  reaches 
out  around,  and  is  drawn  on  all  sides  by  objects  of  sense, 
and  becomes  the  slave  of  many  lusts.  The  multiplicity 
of  wills  in  one  being  is  sin,  because  where  there  is  multi- 
plicity there  must  be  evil,  for  good  is  one  ;2  there  must 
be  collision,  for  evil  is  self-destructive ;  there  must  be 
distraction,  for  it  is  intrinsically  repulsive.  This  inward 
anarchy  is  the  moral  opposite  and  conscious  antagonist 
of  the  Divine  image.  As  it  expelled  it  in  the  beginning, 
60  it  resists  its  restoration  now.  The  nature  of  man 
must  be  once  more  reduced  to  its  intrinsic  unity,  before 
the  image  of  God  can  be  again  impressed  upon  it.  Now 
the  two  generic  forms  in  which  sins  exhibit  themselves, 
are  usurpation  upon  the  majesty  of  God,  and  usur- 
pation   upon    the  equal    rights   of   other    men.      The 

1)  Orig.  in  Oseam,  torn.  iij.  439. 

2)  £(t3\oi  jiiv  yap  an-Awj  navroSan'Zs  61  Kmoi.  Aristot.  Eth.  Nic.  ii,  6. 


208        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

specific  lands  'are  beyond  number.  They  are  as  many 
as  the  manifold  lusts  of  man's  heart,  multiplied  by  all 
the  gradations  of  intensity,  and  by  all  the  inexhaustible 
combinations  of  circumstance,  condition,  and  aggrava- 
tion. What  is  needed,  therefore,  is  a  power  to  subdue, 
and  to  repress  the  human  will ;  and  this  the  Church  pro- 
vides. By  her  authority,  as  God's  vicar  on  the  earth, 
she  subjugates  the  w^hole  energy  of  man  v/hich  struggles 
against  the  will  of  God.  By  her  inward  discipline  she 
checks,  and  through  grace  subdues  to  the  conscience,  the 
aggressive  and  importunate  affections  of  our  nature. 
These  two  forces  are  perpetually  compressing,  as  it  were» 
the  distracted  spirit  of  man  to  an  unity  with  itself;  and  by 
this  they  strengthen  the  natural  powers  of  the  soul.  The 
authority  of  God  arms  the  converted  will  with  a  new 
force  to  coerce  the  lower  appetites ;  the  discipline  of 
the  Church  weakens  the  lower  appetites  by  check  and  by 
repression,  and  so  drives  them  under  the  inward  sway  of 
conscience.  It  is  by  this  equable  pressure  that  the  dis- 
located members  are  reduced  to  their  natural  site  and 
functions.  By  the  illumination  of  the  intellectual  nature 
through  the  one  objective  doctrine,  and  by  the  purifying 
of  the  moral  nature  through  the  one  objective  discipline, 
the  will  is  once  more  enthroned  supreme,  and  its  ener- 
gies united  with  the  will  of  God.  Obedience  passes,  by 
little  and  little,  from  deliberation  and  conscious  effort  to 
a  ready  and  almost  unconscious  volition.  It  becomes 
like  the  docility  and  innocence  of  childhood ;  and  the 
unity  of  the  Church  is  the  mould  in  which  this  character 
is  recast.  The  adaptation  of  the  outward  system  to  this 
result  is  obvious  to  all  who  remember  that  by  the  gift  of 
regeneration  we  receive  the  grace  of  sonship  from  God ; 
and  by  the  organic  system  of  the  Church  is  expressed  the 
fatherhood  of  God  and  the  brotherhood  of  all  mankind.  We 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  209 

are  placed,  as  it  were,  under  the  discipline  of  childhood.  It 
is  the  very  discipline  of  a  household  dilated  to  a  Church  ; 
the  original  discipline  of  nature  strengthened  and  stretch- 
ed abroad  by  the  hand  of  God,  so  as  to  hold  all  men  under 
one  common  Father.  The  lineage  of  natural  birth  has  nei- 
ther virtue  nor  commission  for  more  than  the  discipline  of 
natural  childhood ;  but  the  lineage  of  Faith,  which  is 
the  Church,  a  body  visible,  organized,  articulated  as  the 
family  of  man,  takes  up  the  whole  aggregate  of  moral 
life,  and  carries  on  its  training  for  a  riper  state,  to  which 
this  world  is  as  a  childhood.  The  objective  unity  of  the 
Church,  therefore,  has  the  same  direct  adaptation  to  the 
perfect  restoration  of  the  Divine  image  in  man,  as  the 
objective  unity  of  a  family  has  to  develop  the  gift  of 
regeneration  into  the  rudiments  of  that  image ;  being 
the  natural  discipline  of  humanity  enlarged  and  transfig- 
ured. And  on  this  we  need  only  remark,  further,  that 
the  voluntary  aggregations  of  men  into  communities 
professing  Christianity  are  no  more  Churches,  than  an 
arbitrary  combination  of  fathers  and  children  under  one 
roof  are  a  family.  The  one  constitutive  principle  is 
wanting,  which  is  the  will  of  God  knitting  them  in  one 
by  a  revealed  or  natural  sanction.  They  have  not  the 
first  element  of  moral  unity.  They  have  no  relation  to 
each  other ;  no  fatherly  authority,  no  brotherly  claims. 
The  very  essence  of  a  family  is  natural  order,  based 
upon  the  duties  of  submission  and  the  rights  of  equality. 
God  is  the  author  of  these  relations  by  the  appointments 
of  nature.  The  lines  of  parental  authority  are  a  silent 
revelation,  as  divine  as  the  voice  of  God  at  Sinai;  and 
the  polity  of  a  family  is  as  exactly  ordained  of  God  as 
the  pattern  which  was  shown  to  Moses  in  the  Mount. 
Without  this  authorship  and  sanction  there  could  be  no 
parental  authority,  and  no  filial  obedience,  and,  therefore, 
no  moral  disciphne  of  the  will.     For  this  reason  the  di- 

10* 


210  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

vinely  constituted  polity  of  the  Church  effects  what  no 
other  system  can. 

And,  once  more,  the  difference  between  a  civil  and  a 
domestic  polity  lies  chiefly  in  this.  The  civil  can  coerce 
outward  but  not  inward  obedience  ;  it  can  reach  the  acts 
but  not  the  affections  of  men ;  it  can  prescribe  for  the 
broader  but  not  for  the  finer  moralities  of  life.  The  civil 
governor  can  but  mould  the  frame  or  skeleton  of  the 
outward  conduct :  all  that  makes  up  life  and  character 
is  beyond  his  power.  This  only  the  suasion  and  correc- 
tion of  domestic  discipline,  that  is  of  fatherhood,  can 
reach  and  fashion ;  and  therefore  it  is  that  in  families 
men's  characters  are  formed,  but  in  states  only  their  ac- 
tions are  governed.  But  the  one  Church,  which  is  an  ex- 
panded family  under  the  fatherhood  of  God,  can  do  both. 
It  forms  by  an  outward  or  political  coercion  the  exterior 
course  of  obedience,  and  it  shapes  by  a  lighter  and  un- 
erring hand  the  full  lineaments  of  Christ's  image.  Its 
correction  reaches  the  unwritten  moralities  :  it  enters  into 
the  inner  heart  of  man ;  it  forbids  unforgiving  thoughts  ; 
it  commands  a  man  to  render  good  for  evil,  blessing 
for  cursing;  it  obliges  him  to  love  God  and  man,  and  it 
rebukes  him  if  he  disobey.  It  works  as  the  presiding 
wisdom  of  a  father,  and  broods  with  the  creative  energy 
of  the  Divine  presence  over  the  moral  world  as  it  rises 
again  towards  the  image  of  God. 

To  sum  up  this  chapter :  it  may  be  said  tliat  the  ob- 
jective Unity  of  the  Church  is  a  means  of  restoring  man 
to  the  image  of  God,  by  expressing  and  transmitting  the 
knowledge  of  that  image  in  the  manhood  of  Christ:  by 
impressing  it  upon  man  through  the  one  gift  of  regener- 
ation, and  the  one  organic  discipline :  by  uniting  all  na- 
tions in  one  body,  and  bringing  them  under  one  rule  and 
power  :  by  correcting  the  exorbitances  of  human  actions, 
and  reducing  the  moral  nature  of  man  to  unity  with  itself: 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


211 


in  which  unity  of  the  rational  and  moral  will  consists  the 
image  of  God  in  man.  The  Unity  of  the  Church,  there- 
fore, may  be  called  the  Sacrament  of  the  Divine  image, 
being  a  means  ordained  of  God,  through  Christ,  for  re- 
storinof  it  to  the  moral  beinsr  of  mankind. 


CHAPTER    IV. 


THE    UNITT    OF    TH3     CHTJKCH     A.     PROBATION     OT     THE     FAITH     AND 
"WILL    OF    MAN. 


The  next  point  to  be  shown  is,  how  the  Unity  of  the 
Church  is  a  means  in  the  moral  probation  of  man. 

It  is  evident,  as  I  have  said  before,  that  the  work  of 
oar  redemption  in  ns  is  a  transcendent  mystery,  of  which 
the  will  of  man  is  the  centre.  We  must  believe  that  the 
fall  both  of  angels  and  of  men  is  the  ahenation  of  the  will 
from  God ;  and  that  our  redemption  is  the  reclaiming  of 
it  from  the  bondage  of  evil.  It  t'bllows,  therefore,  upon 
this,  that  the  whole  scheme  of  our  redemption  should  be 
so  framed  as  to  address  itself  directly  to  the  principle  of 
volition.  By  baptism  the  will  is  not  extinguished,  but  re- 
generated ;  by  our  after-discipline  it  is  not  overborne,  but 
strengthened  to  perfection.  The  argument  of  the  last 
chapter  may  be  here  taken  as  the  basis  of  the  present, 
and  we  may  rest  upon  it,  while  we  confine  ourselves  to 
tracing  out  one  of  its  features,  which  is  a  trait  so  leading 
and  prominent  as  to  be  almost  specifically  distinct. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  we  may  observe  that  the  Unity 
of  the  Church  is  a  probation  of  the  faith  of  man — as  an 
object  proposed  to  his  belief.  That  God  should  inter- 
pose to  save  man  at  all  is  of  course  a  probation  of  faith  : 
that  He  should  undertake  to  save  man  in   this   or  that 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  213 

particular  way,  or  in  this  and  in  no  other  way,  e.  g.^ 
through  the  one  sacrifice  of  His  Son,  is  a  further  proba- 
tion of  our  faith.  Unbehevers,  both  heathen  and  apos- 
tate, have  cavilled  at  the  way  of  our  redemption  through 
Christ:  at  the  unobviousness  of  its  intrinsic  efficacy:  at 
the  seeming  inconsecutiveness  of  the  ideas  of  His  death 
and  of  our  forgiveness :  at  the  narrowness  and  exclusive- 
ness,  if  I  may  so  speak,  of  the  scheme  which  shuts  out 
every  other  form  of  propitiation  and  acceptable  obedience. 
It  is  plain,  therefore,  that  not  only  is  the  fact  of  our  re- 
demption, but  the  unity  of  the  way  of  our  redemption,  a 
probation  of  the  faith  of  man.  Now  our  present  argu- 
ment is  ulterior  and  parallel  to  this :  as  it  has  pleased 
God  to  ordain  one  sacrifice  as  the  meritorious  cause  of 
our  redemption,  so  He  has  ordained  one  Church  as  the 
channel  of  its  communication  to  mankind.  It  is  a  proba- 
tion of  man's  faith,  therefore,  to  beheve  that  to  this  one 
Church  alone,  and  to  no  other  community,  sect,  or  body, 
is  the  virtue  of  the  Divine  Sacrifice,  and  the  authority  of 
God  to  apply  it  to  the  spirits  of  men,  intrusted. 

As  for  instance  :  the  heathen  of  old  had  in  every  sev- 
eral nation  their  mode  of  propitiation,  and  their  philoso- 
phy of  life.  But  in  the  midst  of  them  all  was  the  Jewish 
people  as  a  consecrated  shrine,  in  w^hich  alone  dwelt  the 
presence  of  God.  To  this,  such  as  had  faith  were  proselyt- 
ed: God  having  made  provision,  not  for  the  recognition 
of  other  systems,  but  for  the  absorption  of  them,  into  one. 
In  like  manner,  at  the  promulgation  of  the  Gospel,  the 
same  line  of  unity  was  carried  on.  Salvation  was  not 
declared  to  be  in  other  modes  of  propitiation,  but  all  na- 
tions were  called  to  partake  of  the  one  Church,  in  which 
was  enshrined  the  one  altar,  and  the  one  only  Sacrifice. 
The  Church,  therefore,  presented  itself  to  the  nations  as 
a  great  visible  phenomenon,  as  one  vast  overspreading 
shadow  cast  from  the  one  invisible  mercy-seat,  in  the 


214  THE    UNITY    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

shelter  of  which  alone  there  was  salvation  for  mankind. 
It  came  to  them  as  a  whole,  as  a  sacrament  of  hidden 
grace,  as  a  sole  messenger  of  glad  tidings.  Their  pro- 
bation was  to  receive  it  or  reject  it  as  a  whole ;  and  they 
were  either  saved  or  not  saved  accordingly.  "  If  our  Gos- 
pel be  hid,  it  is  hid  to  them  that  are  lost."  "  We  are 
unto  God  a  eweet  savour  in  Christ,  both  in  them  that  are 
saved  and  in  them  that  perish."  They  were  either  bap- 
tized or  not ;  they  either  washed  away  their  sins  or  not ; 
they  were  either  regenerated  or  not ;  they  were  either 
saved  in  the  one  Church  or  not :  they  had  no  other  to 
turn  to  :  no  sacred  mystery,  no  philosophic  school  :  there 
was  only  one  "  name  under  heaven  given  among  men 
whereby  they  might  be  saved  j"  and  the  power  of  that 
name  was  enshrined  in  the  one  Church,  at  the  advent  of 
which  all  other  religions  everywhere  fell  prostrate,  and 
all  other  philosophies  were  abolished. 

It  was  the  Unity  of  the  Church  that  demanded  this 
unity  and  singleness  of  choice,  and  thus  summed  up  their 
probation  into  one  decision  of  the  will.  They  could  not 
accept  one  part  and  reject  another ;  they  could  not  take 
the  doctrine  and  refuse  the  discipline  of  the  Church : 
it  was  as  the  voice  and  the  form  of  one  heavenly  being, 
like  the  angel  visitors  of  old.  Every  attempt  to  cull  out, 
and  to  accommodate  any  portion  or  feature  of  the  evan- 
gelical phenomenon,  produced  a  heresy  or  a  schism ; 
and  the  Church  disowned  both  as  spurious  offsets,  as 
mere  mocking  phantoms  personating  the  one  only 
Church  of  God.  Along  the  whole  stream  of  her  history 
the  Church  moved  on  in  solitude,  accepting  nothing  but 
an  absolute  submission,  and  an  universal  homage  from 
all  the  powers  of  man  to  all  the  mysteries  of  God.  Not 
only  the  Gnostic,  Ebionite,  and  Arian  heresies,  which 
violated  the  unity  of  truth,  but  the  Novatian  and  Dona- 
tist  schisms  which  swerved  from  tlie  unity  of  form,  alike 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  215 

cut  off  the  originators  and  maintainers  of  their  error  from 
the  one  body  of  Christ.  Their  attempt  was  to  retouch 
the  perfect  and  unchangeable  ordinance  of  God.  In  so 
doing  they  fell  from  it  altogether.  The  same  also  was 
the  probation  of  Constantine.  Men  sometimes  speak  as 
if  he  had  made  choice  of  the  Church  Catholic  from  a 
throng  of  other  Christian  bodies,  and  advanced  it  to  a 
special  precedence.  But  he  knew  no  choice  save  only 
Christianity  in  the  Church  or  Paganism  without  it.  To 
the  Church,  as  God's  only  representative  and  vicegerent 
upon  earth,  he  yielded  up  himself  and  his  imperial 
power. 

In  truth  it  is  an  easier  thing  to  believe  that  God  will 
save  man  in  a  multitude  of  ways  than  that  He  has  or- 
dained but  one.  There  is  an  innate  readiness  in  man- 
kind to  believe  that  they  shall  stand  well  with  God  in  all 
ways ;  and  an  equal  unwillingness  to  believe  that  it  shall 
go  hard  with  them  in  any.  Therefore  it  is  that  the 
limitation  implied  in  propounding  one  Divine  ordinance 
as  the  way  of  salvation  crosses  every  other  predisposition 
of  man's  natural  heart.  It  seems  to  him  unreasonable 
and  arbitrary.  He  sees  much  that  bears  the  semblance 
of  truth  and  goodness  in  other  systems,  and  he  compares 
and  measures,  and  concludes  the  difference  to  be  not  in 
kind  but  in  degree.  And  yet  men  who  so  reason  believe 
in  the  Divine  institution  of  the  Holy  Sacraments.  They 
can  believe  that  baptism  alone  confers  a  title  to  Chris- 
tianity, and  yet  cannot  believe  that  the  Church  alone 
contains  an  authority  to  baptize.  The  man  that  beheves 
in  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sin,  but  not  in  one 
Church  for  the  salvation  of  mankind,  is  plainly  inconsist- 
ent in  his  reasoning.  One  baptism  is  a  condition  as 
arbitrary  and  exclusive  as  one  Church.  It  would  be  hard 
for  them  to  say  why  the  rejection  of  baptism  when  offered 
to  them  involves  a  greater  failure  in  the  moral  proba- 


216        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

tion  than  a  rejection  of  the  Church.  Nay,  it  would  be 
easier  to  prove  against  them,  by  reasoning  ci  priori  from 
what  seems  fit,  and  Hkely  too,  that  God  has  constituted 
on  earth  one  and  one  only  authoritative  witness  of  Him- 
self, than  that  he  has  tied  remission  of  sins  to  one,  and 
that  not  so  much  a  moral  as  a  merely  positive  ordinance. 
And  so  indeed  it  will  bj  found  at  last,  that  the  objection, 
although  made  apparently  against  this  or  that  particular 
way  in  which  it  is  alleged  that  God  has  ordained  the 
salvation  of  the  world,  is  made  in  fact  against  the  idea 
of  God's  ordaining  any  positive  way  at  all.  In  the  full 
career  of  objection  men  are  hardly  aware  of  the  moral 
habit  which  impels  them.  The  idea  that  the  authority 
of  God  is  by  revelation  lodged  anywhere  at  all  among 
men  is  a  greater  difficulty  to  man's  heart,  than  that  it  is 
lodged  in  this  or  in  that,  or  in  any  one  only  body.  The 
first  is  a  question  of  the  fact,  the  latter  is  only  an  after- 
adjustment  of  the  mode  or  degree  of  the  expansion  or 
contraction  of  the  area  of  the  mystery  which  is  admitted 
to  exist.  Here  is  the  real  struggle.  It  is  the  uncon- 
scious pantheism  of  our  nature  striving  to  re-assert  its 
ascendency  within  the  precincts  of  Christianity,  and 
urging  men  to  believe  that  the  will  and  presence  of  God, 
if  expressed  anywhere,  is  expressed  everywhere  :  that 
the  authority  of  God,  if  intrusted  to  one  particular  body, 
is  intrusted  equally  to  all.  But  this  is  in  fact  to  get  rid 
of  the  whole  idea:  for  by  such  an  intellectual  process 
other  Christian  communities  are  not  raised  to  the  direct 
sanctions  of  the  Catholic  Church  ;  but  her  positive  and 
direct  institution  is  denied  or  explained  away  to  reduce 
her  also  to  the  permissive,  unauthoritative  character  of 
the  rest.  It  exacts  too  much  of  the  lurking  incredulity  of 
man  to  believe  that  the  Pastors  of  the  Church  are  directly 
commissioned  from  heaven:  that  their  office  is  "not  of 
men,  neither  by  man,  but  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  God  the 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        217 

Father,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead."^  This  brings 
too  near  the  contact  between  heaven  and  earth.  Men 
see  around  them  others,  it  may  be,  more  learned,  more 
devoted,  more  self-denying,  more  unwearied  in  good 
works,  more  effectual  in  persuasion,  and  they  cannot  be- 
lieve these  to  be  without  commission  and  the  others  to 
possess  the  authority  of  God.  And  thus  the  doctrine  of 
the  Apostolical  Succession,  which  is  the  Unity  of  the 
Church  under  its  primary  aspect,  is  after  all  a  probation  of 
faith.  The  very  idea  of  a  lineage  transmitting  the  au- 
thority which  God  gave  to  His  Son  Jesus  Christ  is  an 
object  and  article  of  belief  requiring  not  more  conviction 
of  reason  than  docility  of  heart.  Where  one  man  rejects 
it  at  the  dictate  of  the  mind,  judging  by  evidence,  multi- 
tudes reject  it  at  the  instigation  of  the  heart,  failing  ^t 
the  probation  of  believing  in  the  continuous  presence  of 
God's  direct  authority.  We  shall  find  this  indocility  and 
lack  of  faith  running  through  their  views  of  the  whole 
work  of  redemption.  As,  for  instance,  there  are  many 
who  altogether  disbelieve  the  power  of  absolution.  They 
mask  their  incredulity  under  a  jealousy  for  God,  as  ihey 
who  objected  to  cur  Lord,  "Who  can  forgive  sins  but 
God  only  ?"^  But  on  this  axiom  there  is  no  controversy. 
The  only  question  is,  whether  or  no  God  has  intrusted 
to  any  upon  earth  the  power  to  forgive  sins.  And 
this  returns  into  the  Apostolical  Succession,  and  that 
into  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  which,  after  all,  lies  at  the 
bottom  of  their  probation.  So  again  there  are  others 
who  believe  that  there  exists  in  the  Church  a  power  of 
absolution,  and  yet  cannot  define  what  it  is.  They  can- 
not believe  it  to  be  authoritative,  like  the  absolution  of 
the  Apostles  ;  nor  yet  unauthoritative,  like  the  declara- 
tions of  laymen.  They  are  perplexed  and  sometimes 
irritated:    they  chafe  against  the  pretension,   and   yet 

1)  Gal.  i.  1.  2)  St.  Mark  ii.  7. 


218  THE    UNITY    or    THE    CHURCH. 

cannot  deny  it  altogether  ;  as  being  in  a  strait  between 
usurping  upon  the  prerogative  of  God  and  diminishing  the 
authority  of  the  Church.  Now  in  this  case  also  the 
question  returns  into  the  idea  of  one  divinely-commis- 
sioned body  speaking  in  the  name  of  God.  The  proba- 
tion is  to  believe  that  there  is  such  a  body  on  earth,  and 
that  it  alone  has  the  plenary  authority  of  Him  who  said, 
"As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.'" 

We  shall  the  more  evidently  see  how  this,  after  all, 
is  no  more  than  a  simple  probation  of  faith,  if  we  con- 
sider how  much  apparent  Christianity  there  is  in  the 
world  without  any  faith  at  all.  To  become  a  Christian 
in  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  was  a  conscious  act  of  the 
individual  choice  and  will.  And  so  it  is  still  in  the  con- 
version of  adults.  But  as  these  are  the  rare  and  out- 
lying exceptions,  the  whole  body  of  Christendom  is  by 
an  act  of  God  made  Christian  without  any  conscious  act 
of  choice.  Generation  after  generation  grows  up  among 
the  objects  of  faith,  and  as  the  energy  of  the  reason  and 
the  heart  unfold,  every  several  reality  of  faith,  unless 
slighted,  becomes  a  direct  probation  of  the  will.  The 
Unity  of  the  Church  is  an  article  of  the  Baptismal  Creed, 
and  an  object  of  faith  as  truly  and  fully  as  the  article  of 
the  Incarnation,  or  Resurrection  of  Christ.  These  arti- 
cles are  by  perfect  Christians  consciously  accepted  one 
by  one,  until  the  whole  is  incorporated  in  the  moral 
nature.  Oftentimes  they  are  held  implicitly  :  sometimes 
they  are  in  part  secretly  rejected  :  sometimes  they  may 
be  reduced  to  the  smallest  remainder  which  will  consist 
with  a  continued  profession  of  Christianity :  sometimes 
they  are  so  faintly  held  as  rather  to  be  not  denied  than 
believed.  And  yet  we  shall  find  all  these  several  classes 
of  persons  living,  more  or  less,  a  seemingly  Christian  life. 
They  fulfil  the  obligations  of  personal  and  economical 

1)   St.  John  XX.  21. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        219 

morality :  they  observe  the  rights  of  pohtical  justice : 
ihey  are  blameless  sons,  fathers,  citizens  :  they  mix  in 
the  communion  of  the  Church,  and  partake  of  her  minis- 
trations, but  their  outward  life  is  rather  a  coincidence 
with  her  moral  scheme,  than  a  consequence  of  her  spirit- 
ual grace.  Now  such  men,  looking  around  them,  and 
seeing  in  other  communities  all  they  are  conscious  of  in 
themselves,  having  no  aspiration,  no  sympathy,  no  weak- 
ness which  might  not  be  satisfied  as  well  without  as 
within  the  Church,  cannot  but  regard  the  Church  as 
only  one  of  many  like  communities,  perhaps  the  oldest, 
it  may  be  the  best,  the  most  conformable  to  society  as  a 
whole,  and  the  most  helpful  to  the  offices  of  civil  govern- 
ment, and  yet,  after  all,  only  one  of  a  number  all  equally 
wanting  in  direct  authority  from  God.  The  Unity  of  the 
Church  is  the  matter  of  their  probation.  They  neither 
believe  it  as  a  mystery,  nor  yearn  after  it  as  the  stay  of 
their  soul.  It  is  the  same  habit  which  makes  other  men 
deliberately  reject  or  indolently  slight  the  Sacraments  of 
Christ :  they  neither  believe  in  their  mysterious  power, 
nor  feel  their  own  need  of  the  proffered  grace.  The 
Unity  of  the  Church  may  be  viewed  as  the  one  all-com- 
prehending Sacrament  of  the  Person  of  Christ,  from  the 
side  of  which  Holy  Baptism  and  the  Holy  Eucharist 
flow  forth  as  the  water  and  the  blood.  All  these  doc- 
trines then  are  objects  of  faith ;  and  by  propounding 
them  to  the  w^orld,  the  faith  of  man  is  put  on  trial  before 
God. 

We  may  now  go  on  to  another  topic.  The  Unity  of 
the  Church  is  a  continuous  probation  of  the  moral  habit 
of  man  as  a  discipline  of  the  w^ill.  We  have  already 
trenched  upon  a  portion  of  this  subject  in  showing  how 
the  Unity  of  the  Church  acts  as  a  plastic  discipline  in  the 
restoration  of  man  to  the  Divine  image.  We  shall  now 
examine  the  ethical  process  of  that  discipline.    By  the 


220        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

objective  Unity  of  the  Church,  which  is  the  direct  institu- 
tion of  God,  He  has  gathered  into  one  body  a  large  por- 
tion of  mankind.  He  has  so  disposed  thai  one  body  into 
an  organic  and  articulated  system,  as  to  develop  a  per- 
fect internal  order  of  supremacy,  subjection,  and  mutual 
relation  of  parts.  The  proximate  final  aim  of  this  object- 
ive unity  is,  as  I  have  said,  the  subjective  or  moral  Unity 
of  the  Church :  they  are  as  cause  and  consequence,  or 
rather  as  means  and  end. 

The  simplest  form  of  this  principle  is  the  internal  unity 
of  a  single  flock  under  its  pastor.  In  every  such  body 
there  is  an  aggregation  of  individual  wills,  of  which  each 
severally  contains  a  disturbing  force,  tending  perpetually 
to  a  disruption  of  unity.  Of  this  St.  Augustine  speaks  in 
expounding  the  mystical  import  of  the  miraculous  draught 
of  fishes.  "  The  two  ships,"  he  says,  "  did  not  sink,  but 
were  in  danger  of  sinking.  Why  in  danger  ?  Because 
of  the  multitude  of  fishes.  By  this  is  signified  that  by  the 
multitude  which  the  Church  should  afterwards  gather 
together  discipline  should  be  endangered  ;  and  this  is  add- 
ed in  the  account  of  the  draught  of  fishes,  that  the  nets 
were  broken  by  the  multitude  of  fishes.  What  do  the 
broken  nets  signify  but  the  schisms  which  should  come? 
There  are  therefore  three  things  signified  in  this  draught 
of  fishes — the  mixture  of  good  and  evil  men,  the  pressure 
of  multitudes,  and  the  separation  of  heretics."^  "  Let  us 
see  if  there  be  not  gathered  in  the  Church  such  a  multi- 
tude, that  the  grain  scarcely  appears  in  so  great  a  mass 
of  chafl'.  How  many  robbers,  how  many  drunkards,  how 
many  cursers,  how  many  Irequeniers  of  theatres  !  Do 
not  the  very  same  men  fill  the  churches  who  fill  also  the 
theatres?  and  for  the  most  part  seek  by  seditions  in  the 
Church  the  very  same  things  they  are  wont  to  seek  in 
the  theatres?  and  if  any  thing  of  a  spiritual  kind  be 

1)  S.  Aug.  Serm.  cell.    In  dieb.  Posch.  v.  1034. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  221 

spoken  or  enjoined  they  resist,  and  contend  against  it,  fol- 
lowing after  the  flesh  and  fighting  against  the  Holy- 
Ghost Then  it  follows  that  the  nets  were  broken. 

The  nets  being  broken,  heresies  and  schisms  are  made. 
The  nets  inclosed  all ;  but  the  fish,  impatient  and  unwill- 
ing to  come  to  the  food  of  the  Lord,  wheresoever  they 
can,  free  themselves  and  break  and  go  out.  And  these 
nets  were  spread  abroad  everywhere ;  but  they  who 
break  them  break  them  in  parts.  The  Donatists  broke 
them  in  Africa,  the  Arians  broke  them  in  Egypt,  the  Pho- 
tinians  broke  them  in  Pannonia,  the  Cataphryges  broke 
them  in  Phrygia,  the  Manichseans  broke  them  in  Persia. 
In  how  many  places  was  the  net  broken,  and  yet  those 
whom  it  inclosed  it  drew  to  shore.  It  drew  them  to 
shore,  indeed ;  but  did  it  bring  them  that  broke  the  nets  ? 
All  the  bad  went  forth.  Only  the  bad  went  forth,  though 
there  yet  remained  both  good  and  bad."^  In  this  we 
have  a  vivid  expression  of  the  moral  probation  of  men 
through  the  objective  unity  of  discipline.  It  is  the  fine 
and  fragile  bond  which  gathers  them  in  one,  strong 
enough  to  hold  the  willing,  and  to  check  the  faint  strug- 
gles of  an  uncertain  resistance,  but  yielding  a  ready  out- 
let to  the  stubborn  and  the  violent.  This  thread  of  unity 
by  its  very  frailty  is  the  finer  and  severer  probation  of  the 
will.  It  is  a  "  law  of  liberty"  prompting  the  inner  man 
at  the  suggestion  of  Christ's  example.  The  evangelical 
axioms,  "  Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  to 
you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them,"  "  Look  not  every  man  on 
his  own  things,  but  every  man  also  on  the  things  of  oth- 
ers," "  Be  subject  one  to  another,"  "  Obey  them  that  have 
the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves,"  "  Whosoever 
will  be  great  among  you  let  him  be  your  minister," — 
these  and  the  like  first  laws,  enjoining  subordination  and 
brotherhood  in  Christ,  prescribe  to  us  the  tempers  which, 

1)  S.  Aug.  Serm.  cclii. 


222        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

as  they  conserve  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  so  are  they 
tested  and  ascertained  by  the  unity  of  discipline.  There 
is  also  in  the  order  of  the  Church  a  probation  of  our  intel- 
lectual nature,  for  the  right  conduct  of  which  we  are  res- 
ponsible. The  tendency  of  all  men  is  to  put  subjective 
opinion  in  the  place  of  objective  truth.  This  is  directly 
encountered  by  the  delivery  of  a  dogmatic  faith  embodied 
in  Creeds  and  Catholic  traditions  ;  and  the  probation  of 
the  moral  reason  is  brought  to  a  point  by  the  subjection 
of  men  as  learners  to  an  order  of  men  who  are  divinely 
commissioned  to  teach.  Against  this  ordinance  of  Christ 
the  whole  throng  of  indocile,  self-trusting,  irreverent,  con- 
temptuous dispositions  of  the  heart  rise  in  rebellion.  And 
so  it  was  foreseen  ;  and  for  the  mortification  and  rooting 
out  of  these  tempers  this  very  ordinance  was  designed ; 
and  their  revolt  manifests  His  wisdom  who  ordained  it 
as  a  test  to  detect  and  a  curb  to  check  them.  The  whole 
lineage  of  heresies,  and  the  whole  history  of  schism,  is 
but  a  continuous  attestation  that  the  pastoral  office  is  the 
institution  of  Him  who  knew  what  was  in  man.  The 
idea  of  humbly  learning  God's  truth,  and  of  passively  re- 
ceiving sacramental  mysteries  from  the  hands  of  a  man 
like  ourselves  ;  of  submitting  to  counsel,  reproof,  rebuke, 
correction,  at  the  judgment  of  a  fellow-sinner,  is  a  test 
and  probation  of  our  moral  habit,  which  by  its  searching 
and  salutary  virtue  attests  itself  to  be  of  God.  In  this 
way,  then,  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church  tries  man 
in  the  two  points  of  moral  duty  least  akin  to  his  fallen 
nature — forbearance  and  submission. 

The  same  remarks,  it  is  plain,  will  apply  in  like  man- 
ner to  the  fellowship  of  pastors  under  their  superiors  in 
every  subdivision  of  the  Catholic  Church,  until  we  reach 
the  college  of  Catholic  bishops,  by  whom  the  whole  is 
governed.  The  absolute  irresponsibihty  of  every  Catho- 
lic bishop,  so  long  as  he  shall  administer  his  Church  within 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        223 

the  rule  of  canonical  order ;  and  keep  himself  free  from 
pravity  of  doctrine  and  viciousness  of  life,  is  an  axiom  as 
self-evident  as  the  absolute  equality  of  the  Apostles. 
Within  the  limits  above  prescribed  they  owe  an  account 
to  God  alone.  ^  Now,  as  it  is  through  their  pastor  that 
the  members  of  every  several  flock  are  in  unity  with 
each  other,  so  it  is  through  the  bishop  that  every  several 
Church  is  in  unity  with  the  Church  at  large.  The  bishops, 
therefore,  are  likewise  on  a  probation  of  mutual  forbear- 
ance and  forgiveness  one  with  another.  It  was  to  warn 
them  especially  against  the  love  of  precedence  and  lust 
of  dominion  that  our  Lord  washed  His  Apostles'  feet. 
He  foresaw  how  naturally  they  leaned  towards  the  de- 
pression of  others  and  the  elevation  of  themselves ;  and 
how  surely  these  motives  would  afterwards  ripen  into  am- 
bitious usurpation  and  antichristian  aggression.  There- 
fore in  the  apostolic  college  He  instituted  the  seminal 
principle  of  Cathohc  unity,  namely,  a  precedence  among 
equals,  and  by  His  example  taught  the  moral  habit  which 
alone  can  keep  it  whole  and  undivided.  The  mutual 
relation,  therefore,  of  Cathohc  bishops  in  the  universal 
Church  is  the  same  test  of  brotherly  equality ;  and  they, 
too,  have  a  master  in  heaven  to  whom  they  must  render 
account  of  all  their  trespasses  against  His  ordinance  and 
His  example. 

And  in  this  way  it  is  that  Christ  weighs  the  spirits  of 
all  His  servants.  The  balanced  order  in  which  He  has 
disposed  them  is  so  delicate  and  nice  that  it  will  indicate 
the  lightest  swaying  of  the  will.  They  are  so  poised  be- 
tween the  harmonized  powers  of  a  manifold  influence  that 
self  cannot  stir  without  detection.  And  ihis  wonderful 
scheme  is  a  divine  work.  The  contrivances  of  man  are 
cumbrous,  irregular,  and  self-defeating.  None  could  de- 
vise it  but  He  only  "  who  doth  bind  the  sweet  influences  of 

1)  S.  Cyp.  Ep.  xxxi.  and  Concil.  Carthag.  p.  330.  ed.  Ben. 


224  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  Pleiades,  and  loose  the  bands  of  Orion."  The  faults 
and  detects  of  human  systems  betray  themselves  by  bring- 
ing on  their  own  dissolution  ;  e.  g.  the  secessions  from  vol- 
untary and  defectible  societies  end  in  absolute  extinction  : 
but  in  the  one  indefectible  Church  they  work  out  the  mind 
of  God :  while  they  seem  to  defeat,  they  do  but  fulfil  His 
purpose.  "  There  must  be  also  heresies  among  you,  that 
they  which  are  approved  {ol  66y.t/iioi,  the  tested,  or  tried) 
may  be  manifest.'"  "  They  went  out  from  us,  but  they 
were  not  of  us  ;  for  if  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  no 
doubt  have  continued  with  us ;  but  they  went  out,  that  they 
might  be  made  manifest  that  they  were  not  all  of  us."^ 
They  that  separate  from  the  Unity  of  the  Church  con- 
demn themselves ;  they  lay  open  their  own  moral  disease 
beefore  men  and  angels ;  they  prove  in  deed  what  they 
deny  in  word,  that  their  moral  habit  has  an  antipathy  to 
equality  and  to  submission;  that  their  will  is  not  at  unity 
with  God.  By  this  principle  we  may  solve  all  the  pheno- 
mena of  contention  between  Christian  men  and  Christian 
Churches  from  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel.  The  objec- 
tive Unity  of  the  Church,  as  the  net,  has  inclosed  them  in 
a  continuous  probation.  It  has  done  its  work  both  when  it 
has  held  them  fast  and  when  it  has  let  them  break  through. 
Either  way  they  were  made  manifest;  either  way  they 
were  approved  or  reprobate.  While  men  have  disputed 
against  unity  it  has  provedthem:  it  casts  upon  them  a  spell 
of  self-detection  :  itself  abiding  inviolate,  it  suffers  thern  to 
depart  convicted  of  themselves :  for  what  is  this  probation 
of  man  but  the  presence  of  Him  "  whose  fan  is  in  His 
hand,"  who  even  now  in  the  midst  unseen  is  thoroughly 
purging  his  floor,  against  that  day  when  He  shall  "  gather 
His  wheat  into  the  garner,"  and  "  burn  up  the  chaff  with 
unquenchable  fire." 

In  the  course  of  these  remarks,  then,  we  have  seen 

1)   1  Coi.  xi.  19,  2)  1  St.  John  ii.  19. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  225 

that  the  objective  unity  of  doctrine  and   disciphne   is   a 
means  ordained  of  God  to  work  out  the  subjective  Unity 
of  the  Church.     Now  from  this  principle  will  follow  two 
consequences  of  the  greatest  moment;  and  to  these,  there- 
fore, we  must  advert.     And,  first,  it  is  evident  that  the 
objective  unity  cannot  be  wholly  forfeited  without  forfeit- 
ure of  the  subjective  unity,  and  therein  of  aU  that  is  es- 
sential to  the  being  of  the  Church.     I  say  wholly,  because 
there  are  faults  and  failures  of  a  particular  and  limited 
kind  which  we  must  hereafter  examine  severally  and  with 
attention.     I  speak  now  of  the  casting  off  of  the  doctrine 
and  discipline  of  the  Church,  whether  by  an  individual 
or  by  a  nation.     It  is  plain  that  by  so  doing  they  forfeit 
the  presence  of  the  Church  altogether,  just  as  much  as 
they  who  reject  the  consecrated  elements  make  forfeit  of 
the  Sacraments  of  Christ.     What  is  it  that  distinguishes 
a  Christian  from  a  Heathen  people,  but  the  possession 
and  transmission  of  that  objective  system  of  truth  and 
practice,  or,  in  other  words,  of  doctrine   and  discipline 
which  was  "  once  delivered  to  the  saints  "  ?     By  forfeiting 
them,  howsoever  much  of  lingering  truth  and  morality 
they  may  retain,  the  nation  becomes  dechristianized,  as 
Trypho,  the  Jew,  by  the  rejection  of  the  Mosaic,  and  the 
adoption   of  the  philosophic  system,  denationahzed  and 
disinherited  himself  from  the  family  of  Abraham.     Such, 
too,  is  the  condition  of  many  countries  in  Africa  and  the 
East,  from  which  the  Church   was  swept  away  by  the 
flood  of  the  Arabian  Antichrist.     The  reason  of  this  is 
plain.     The  revelation  of  the  Gospel  is  an  ordinance  of 
God.     It  comes  from  above  ;  is  external  to  the  mind  and 
heart  of  man  ;  is  propao^ated  by  a  series  of  acts,  such  as 
ordination,  succession,  sacraments  ;  is  embodied  in  docu- 
ments, such  as  the  Scriptures  and  rituals.     The  cessation 
of  these  mystical  acts  is  a  breach  in  the  line,  and  a  forfeit- 
ure of  the  hold  which  was  before  maintained  on  the  ori- 

11 


226        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

ginal  institution  of  Christ.  The  Church  as  an  external 
ordinance,  although  it  is  in  many  other  respects  unUke, 
may  be  compared  to  a  lineal  succession  of  a  governing 
power  and  an  organic  civil  polity.  When  these  are  for- 
feited, there  is  an  actual  extinction  of  the  first  idea  of  a 
kingdom.  The  people  yet  remains,  but  without  unity  and 
without  government.  The  nation  yet  subsists  in  its 
elements,  but  the  individual  national  life  is  gone.  As  a 
body  or  system  it  is  perished.  This,  in  the  words  of  our 
Lord,  is  the  removing  of  the  "  candlestick  out  of  his 
place." 

The  next  conclusion  is  this,  that  the  subjective  unity 
may  be  forfeited  without  a  forfeiture  of  the  objective 
unity.  It  is  obvious  that  the  forfeiture  of  the  Sacraments 
involves  a  forfeiture  of  the  grace  of  the  Sacraments.  But 
the  converse  is  not  true.  The  grace  of  the  Sacraments 
is  often  baffled  and  repelled,  while  the  Sacraments  re- 
main perfect.  Simon  Magus  received  Baptism,  though 
he  received  not  the  grace  of  Baptism.'  So  in  the  body 
of  the  Church  at  all  times  the  grace  of  the  Sacraments 
is  perhaps  baffled  and  forfeited  by  the  majority  of  adult 
Christians,  though  the  Sacraments  are  still  in  full  power 
and  authority  testifying  against  them.  So  again  with 
the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church,  which  is  the  means, 
and  maybe  called  the  Sacrament,  of  subjective  or  moral 
unity ;  the  sins  and  divisions  of  men  may  render  ineffec- 
tual all  its  grace  and  discipline.  This  we  see  continually 
and  in  almost  every  flock  :  there  arc  everywhere  mem- 
bers who  by  schismatical  tempers  are  perpetually  forfeit- 
ing the  grace  of  moral  unity,  while  none  of  them  commit 
acts  which  involve  excomnmnication;  and  as  with  the 
individual  members  of  a  particular  Church,  so  is  it  with 
the  collective  members  of  the  Church  universal.     The 

1)  "  Nihil  profuit  Sinioni  Mago  visibilis  baptisnius  cui  sanctificatio  in- 
visibilis  defuit."    S.  Aug.  auaest.  in  Levit.  Ixxxiv.  torn.  iii.  524. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  227 

peace  and  amity  between  churches  has  been  oftentimes 
broken,  sometimes  by  the  sins,  and  sometimes  by  the 
misunderstandings  of  pastors  and  bishops.  A  total  sus- 
pension of  communion  has  sometimes  lasted  for  many 
years,  without  either  side  incurring  the  sin  of  formal 
heresy  or  schism,  which  alone  separate  a  Church  from 
the  body  of  Christ.  And  what  has  lasted  long  may  last 
always,  without  the  cutting  off  of  either  from  the  object- 
ive Unity  of  the  Church.  Although  the  channels  of 
communion  on  earth  are  cut  asunder,  yet  the  lines  of  as- 
cent and  descent  from  earth  to  heaven,  by  which  the 
communion  of  sacrifice  and  grace  is  interchanged  be- 
tween the  faithful  and  their  unseen  Head,  are  open  and 
sure. 

And  this  will  be  the  more  evident  if  we  consider  that, 
wdiile  external  unity  is  of  the  nature  of  an  ordinance,  in- 
ternal unity  is  of  the  nature  of  duty.  It  is  the  matter  of 
probation  even  as  chastity,  meekness,  personal  consist- 
ency, and  the  like.  It  admits,  therefore  of  degrees  ;  it 
may  be  more  or  less  perfect :  or,  again,  it  is  as  the  health 
of  the  body  compared  with  its  organic  structure :  or, 
again,  as  the  internal  peace  of  a  family  compared  with 
its  hereditary  lineage,  its  primogeniture,  paternal  author- 
ity, and  the  like.  Now  God  has  secured  none  of  these 
things  absolutely.  They  are  the  subject-matter  of  trial 
and  contingent  possession  ;  and,  therefore,  the  analogy  of 
His  works  forbids  us  to  look  for  subjective  unity  as  an 
inseparable  condition  of  the  Church.  And  what  the 
analogy  of  God's  works  would  lead  us  to  expect,  the  tes- 
timony of  God's  word  confirms  to  us.  Scripture  contains 
neither  pledge  nor  promise  that  the  moral  Unity  of  the 
Church  shall  not  be  broken.  Nay,  the  divisions  in  the 
Corinthian  Church  prove  the  reverse.  Unity  is  a  duty: 
it  is  the  subject  of  admonition,  exhortation,  and  prayer. 
It  was  the  subject  of  the  prayer,  of  our  blessed  Lord, 


228        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

which  is  not,  therefore,  frustrated  and  refused  because 
His  Church  has  from  time  to  time  forfeited  His  inward 
peace.  His  prayers  on  earth  and  His  intercession  in 
heaven  are  both  in  harmony  with  the  laws  of  man's  moral 
probation.  Our  Lord  prayed  that  His  disciples  might  be 
one,  yet  Paul  and  Barnabas  parted  asunder  in  conten- 
tion. He  prayed  that  they  might  be  led  into  all  truth, 
and  yet  Peter  and  Barnabas  dissembled  at  Antioch. 
And  what  we  thus  find  confirmed  by  Scripture,  we  find 
also  proved,  in  fact,  by  history ;  but  of  this  we  shall  speak 
hereafter  in  its  own  place. 

God  has  promised  that  His  one  Church  shall  be  al- 
ways visible,  not  that  it  shall  be  always  internally  united. 
The  parables  of  the  wheat  and  the  tares,  and  of  the  good 
fish  and  the  bad,  are  prophecies  that  there  shall  always 
be  the  elements  of  moral  division.  That  these  should 
for  a  time  prevail  is  according  to  the  nature  of  probation, 
and  the  experience  of  the  Church  from  the  beginning. 
A  body  always  visibly  one,  though  not  always  morally 
one,  there  shall  be  even  to  the  end  of  the  world.  "  There 
is  no  security  for  unity,  except  as  the  Church  is  declared 
by  the  promises  of  God,  which,  being  built  on  a  hill,  can- 
not be  hid."^  Therefore  Su  Augustin  urges  on  all  good 
men  the  duty  of  bearing  with  the  mixture  and  fellowship 
of  the  wicked,  and  the  guilt  of  separating  from  the  Church 
on  the  plea  of  withdrawing  from  evil  men.'^  It  is  certain 
that,  as  the  mastery  of  disease  brings  on  death,  and  the 
dominion  of  sinful  habits  ends  in  apostacy,  so  the  abso- 
lute prevalence  of  internal  division  must  terminate  in  a 
forfeiture  even  of  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church.  It 
is  by  moral  decline  that  the  churches  of  Christ  first  fit 
themselves  for  excision  from  the  one  body :  in  the  end 
they  may  be  left  without  the  very  being  or  rudiments  of 
the  Church. 

1)  S.  Aug.  coatra  Ep.  Faimen.  lib.  iii.  5.  2)  lb. 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH. 


229 


Now,  from  all  that  has  been  said,  it  follows  as  a  sort 
of  corollary  that  in  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church, 
and  in  no  other  way,  is  salvation  offered  to  mankind. 
But  as  this  is  a  subject  of  great  extent  and  difficulty,  it 
must  be  reserved  for  a  separate  chapter,  which,  in  the 
order  of  this  argument,  will  find  its  natural  place  at  the 
beginning  of  the  third  part. 


6    ^ 


CONCLUSION. 


From  what  has  been  said  in  the  last  three  chapters 
we  may  deduce  some  general  conclusions,  and  thus  bring 
this  portion  of  the  subject  to  an  end.  My  endeavour  has 
been  to  show  what  moral  purposes  the  Church  of  God, 
and  especially  that  particular  character  of  it  with  which 
we  are  chiefly  concerned,  was  designed  to  effect.  Al- 
though it  is  unsafe  to  assume  this  or  that  particular  re- 
sult to  be  the  end  of  the  Divine  conduct,  yet  the  great 
axiom,  that  infinite  Wisdom  never  acts  without  a  pur- 
pose, is  so  much  the  more  commandingly  self-evident  in 
the  scheme  of  man's  redemption,  that  we  cannot  do  amiss 
in  seeking  from  God  Himself  a  knowledge  of  His  final 
purposes;  and  this  we  have  done  by  taking  Holy  Scrip- 
ture as  our  guide  in  the  inquiry.  It  has  been  made  evi- 
dent, I  trust,  that  in  the  whole  institution  and  character 
of  the  Church,  God  has  a  complex  moral  end  in  view ; 
that  the  probation  of  man,  the  recovery  of  the  Divine  im- 
age in  his  moral  being,  the  restoration  of  the  true  know- 
ledge of  the  one  God  to  the  world,  and,  through  this  con- 
catenation of  means,  the  glory  of  His  holy  Name,  is  the 
aim  and  intention  of  the  Divine  Author  and  Ruler  of  the 
Church.    I  have  endeavoured  further  to  show  how  this 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        231 

aim  and  intention  is  subserved  and  accomplished  by  the 
character  of  unity  in  particular. 

I  have  the  more  strongly  insisted  upon  this  point  be- 
cause there  is  a  direct  tendency  in  the  human  mind  to 
asume,  almost  unconsciously,  that  we  sufficiently  under- 
stand the  whole  scope  and  bearing  of  God's  dealings  as  to 
be  able  to  estimate  the  comparative  importance  of  the  sev- 
eral parts,  and  their  obligation  upon  our  consciences  in  the 
shape  of  duty.  Hardly  any  thing  is  more  common  than 
to  hear  men  arguing  that  this  or  that  portion  of  the  Di- 
vine economy  might  have  been  otherwise,  that  it  is  an 
accident  or  non-essential,  that  it  is  separable  from  the 
moral  idea  of  redemption,  that  it  is  the  external  form,  the 
mere  shell  of  the  system.  The  effect  of  such  language  is 
to  lead  other  minds,  and,  insensibly,  our  own,  first  to  un- 
dervalue, next  altogether  to  fail  of  seeing,  the  true  design 
of  God  in  the  particular  features  of  His  dispensation: 
then  to  assume  that  what  seems  to  us  without  a  moral 
purpose  is  mutable ;  that  it  might  be  changed,  under  cer- 
tain conditions  ;  that  it  maybe  dispensed  with,  under  the 
actual  present  conditions  in  which  we  find  ourselves  or 
others  to  be ;  and,  lastly,  that  what  may  be  formally  dis- 
pensed with,  may  be,  under  a  plea  of  necessity,  infor- 
mally broken  through.  Now  the  first  fault  in  this  accu- 
mulating error  is  the  assumption  that  we  so  far  know  the 
mind  of  God  as  to  distinguish  between  what  is  necessary 
and  what  is  accidental,  what  is  moral  and  what  is  posi- 
tive, what  is  subject  to  our  control,  and  to  what,  by  a  Di- 
vine ordinance,  we  ourselves  are  subjected.  I  will  give 
one  pregnant  instance,  among  many.  The  visible  polity 
of  the  Church  is  called  an  external  form  :  it  is  assumed 
to  be  an  accident  to  our  participation  in  Christ,  and  to 
our  renewal  in  His  likeness.  It  is  said,  indeed,  that  it 
may  not  be  lightly  changed,  nor  without  urgent  cause 
and  necessity ;  but  these  are  mere  words.     They  only 


232        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

break  the  fall  of  the  sound,  for  in  reason  they  mean  noth- 
ing more  than  that  the  positive  institutions  of  God  are 
subjected  to  the  will  of  man,  so  that  if  he  see  necessity 
(of  which  necessity  he  is  also  to  be  the  judge)  he  may 
change  or  reverse  them.  It  is,  in  fact,  the  argument  of 
those  who  reject  the  material  Sacraments  ;  and,  in  their 
mouths  alone,  it  is  consistent,  and  has,  whether  good  or 
bad,  a  principle  of  its  own.  In  others,  who  hold  to  the 
institution  and  absolute  obligation  of  the  Holy  Sacra- 
ments on  all  to  whom  the  duty  is  sufficiently  propounded, 
the  argument  is  a  mere  confusion  and  inconsistency,  as  I 
shall  endeavour  to  show  by  the  following  reasons  : — 

In  the  first  place,  the  polity  of  the  Church,  including 
the  Apostolical  succession  as  its  primary  condition,  and 
what  is  vulgarly  called  Episcopacy  as  its  aspect  or 
countenance,  has  been  shown  to  be  an  organic  part  of 
the  great  phenomenon  of  objective  unity,  through  which 
the  Holy  Spirit  works  out,  in  the  moral  nature  of  man, 
the  purpose  of  the  Divine  mind.  It  is  to  the  presence  of 
Christ  what  the  structure  of  the  body  is  to  the  living 
soul.  It  is  so  united  to  Christ,  and  filled  with  His  quick- 
ening spirit,  as  to  partake  not  more  of  the  character  of  a 
moral  discipline,  imposed  upon  us  as  a  test  of  our  obedi- 
ence, than  of  the  individuality  of  a  moral  being  to  whose 
living  energies  a  material  form,  though  accidental,  it  may 
be,  in  the  counsel  of  his  Maker,  is  necessary  to  its  condi- 
tion as  a  creature  after  it  is  made.  It  is  therefore  the 
necessary  moral  means  to  a  given  end.  They  that  speak 
60  lightly  of  it  assume  that  this  end  is  accomplished  in 
some  other  way,  of  which  no  account  can  be  given  that 
will  not  equally  overthrow  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy  Sa- 
craments as  means  of  grace.  Assuming  that  this  end  is 
in  other  ways  accomplished,  the  organic  polity  of  the 
Church  is  treated  as  a  development,  a  bodying  forth,  an 
accidental  clothing  of  the  mind  and  principle  of  Chris- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  233 

tianity.  And  here,  in  fact,  is  the  question : — Is  the  Church 
a  means  to  an  end,  or  is  it  a  separable  consequence  of 
that  end  which  may  be  otherwise  effected  ?  Are  we,  by 
means  of  the  Church,  made  partakers  of  Christ ;  or,  be- 
ing otherwise  made  partakers  of  Christ,  are  we,  as  it  may 
happen,  made  partakers  of  the  Church  ?  Or  again,  are 
we,  by  means  of  Baptism,  made  partakers  of  Christ;  or, 
being  otherwise  made  partakers  of  Christ,  are  we,  as  it 
may  be  or  not,  made  partakers  of  Baptism  ?  Baptism  is 
either  a  means  to  make  us  partakers  of  Christ,  or  it  is 
not.^  If  not,  then  how  are  we  made  partakers  of  Him  1 
If  it  be,  it  is  so  as  the  door  of  the  Church,  the  lesser  Sa- 
crament opening  into  the  greater,  "  which  is  His  body, 
the  fulness  of  Him  that  filleth  all  in  all."  And  a  partici- 
pation in  the  Sacrament,  so  to  speak,  of  the  Church  is  as 
generally  necessary  to  salvation  as  a  participation  in  the 
Sacrament  of  Baptism.  Both  are  equally  binding  in  their 
obligation,  equally  moral  in  their  character,  and  equally 
mystical  in  their  energy  and  effect. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  observe,  in  the  next  place, 
that  the  polity  of  the  Church  is  subject  to  no  control  or 
judgment  of  man  ;  and  is  absolutely  immutable,  except 
by  the  authority  of  God  alone. 

It  would  be  hardly  possible  that  any  one,  with  the 
whole  typical  analogy  of  the  Elder  Church  in  Holy 
Scripture  before  his  eyes,  should  have  ventured  on  the 
thought  of  its  mutableness,  if  he  were  not  first  to  assume 
that  the  organic  polity  of  the  Church  is  not  a  means  to 
any  moral  and  mystical  end ;  or  to  imagine  that  he  can 
discover  the  fulfilment  of  all  the  Divine  mind  in  the  moral 
condition  of  those  Christian  communities  which  have 
made  forfeit  of  their  inheritance  in  the  one  visible  Church. 
I  say  he  could  not  venture  to  assert  that  an  appointed 

1)  See  the  Catechism  and  the  Baptismal  Office  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. 

11* 


234        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

means  to  a  transcendent  end,  and  that  too  of  a  moral 
and  mystical  kind,  could  be  mutable  to  man,  who  is  him- 
self to  be  the  subject  of  its  operations.  This  would  be  a 
fancy  of  the  imagination  like  his  of  whom  the  prophet 
says,  "  He  maketh  a  god,  and  worshippeth  it :  he  maketh 
it  a  graven  image,  and  falleth  down  thereto."'  Surely 
their  intellectual  error  is  no  less  gross  who  change  the 
polity  of  the  body  of  Christ,  and  set  up  a  system  devised 
by  the  wit  and  moulded  by  the  will  of  man,  and  call  it  a 
Church.  It  would  be  a  mere  will-worship  to  submit  to 
it.  And  further,  it  is  to  be  remembered  that  this  error  is 
not  a  calm  theory,  drawn  out  by  d  priori  likelihood,  or 
propounded  as  a  probable  speculation  by  unbiassed 
minds  ;  but  it  is  a  scheme  wrung  out,  by  an  after-effort, 
from  the  difficulties  in  which  men  entangle  themselves, 
and  is  the  self-justifying  retrospect  of  minds  already 
pledged  to  make  a  case.  But  into  this  we  cannot  enter 
now :  it  is  mentioned  only  to  lay  bare  the  weakness  and 
unsoundness  of  the  scheme. 

It  only  remains  to  affirm,  on  the  strength  of  all  that 
has  been  said,  that  the  One  Holy  Catholic  Church  is  an 
institution  divine  in  its  original,  and  sacramental  in  its 
character:  that  is,  moral,  mystical,  immutable,  and  ne- 
cessary to  the  salvation  of  all  to  whom  it  is  sufficiently 
propounded. 

And  with  this  conclusion  we  may  leave  the  second 
part  of  the  subject. 

1)  Isaiah  xliv.  14,  15. 


PART   III. 

THE  DOCTRINE  OF  CATHOLIC  UNITY  APPLIED 

TO    THE 

ACTUAL  STATE  OF  CHRISTENDOM. 


h   r.fl  f 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE      TXNITT    OF     THE     CHtJaCH    THE    ONLY   BE7EALED   WAT   OF   SAL- 

VATIOIT. 


In  the  first  Part  of  this  work  I  endeavoured  to  show 
the  nature  of  tlie  Unity  of  the  Church  considered  as  a 
matter  of  fact :  in  the  second,  I  attempted  to  ascertain  its 
idea  and  moral  design  :  in  this  third  and  last  Part,  I  shall 
go  on  to  examine  what  may  be  called  the  faults  or  anom- 
alies in  the  actual  state  of  the  Church  as  compared  with 
the  doctrine  of  unity  here  laid  down. 

But  I  would  not  be  thought  to  do  so  for  the  purpose  of 
adding  fresh  proof  to  what  has  been  before  established. 
The  doctrine  stands  upon  its  own  positive  evidence.  By 
this  it  must  stand  or  fall.  It  is  equally  irregular  either 
to  affirm  or  to  object  on  apparent  a  posteriori  arguments. 
The  proof  of  the  principle  lies  in  the  first  Part:  its  moral 
import  in  the  second  ;  and  my  intention  is  to  apply  it  in 
the  last,  on  which  we  are  now  entering.  The  application 
of  the  principle,  however,  is  of  no  small  moment,  for  it 
will  be  found  that  almost  all  popular  objections  to  the 
Catholic  doctrine  of  unity  are  drawn  from  the  supposed 
difficulties  which  result  on  applying  the  rule  to  the  exist- 
ing state  of  Christendom.  It  is  thought  to  disinherit  of 
their  portion  in  the  One  Church  many  large  bodies  of 


238        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Christian  people  ;  to  invest  with  this  inestimable  birth- 
right a  larger  body  who  are  deemed  to  have  fainter 
traces  of  the  ancestral  character  ;  and  to  render  doubtful 
the  legitimacy  of  our  own  Catholic  and  Apostolic  branch 
of  the  one  true  Church. 

Into  all  these  several  topics  we  shall  enter  in  due 
order  ;  and  that  we  may  do  so  with  the  fullest  apprehen- 
sion of  the  principle  before  us,  I  will  take  up  a  point  which 
was  dropped  at  the  end  of  the  last,  and  reserved  for  the 
present  Part. 

We  there  saw  that  in  the  objective  Unity  of  the 
Church,  and  in  no  other  way,  is  salvation  offered  to  man- 
kind ;^  or,  in  other  words,  that  the  One  Holy  Catholic 
Church  is  an  institution  divine  in  its  original,  and  sacra- 
mental in  its  character — that  is,  moral,  mystical,  and  im- 
mutable, and  necessary  to  the  salvation  of  all  to  whom  it 
is  sufficiently  propounded. 

In  bringing  this  principle  to  bear  on  the  actual  state 
of  the  world,  we  are  met  by  two  remarkable  phenomena : 
the  one,  that  to  two-thirds  of  all  mankind  this  revealed 
way  of  salvation  has  never  been  proposed  at  all ;  the 
other,  that  of  the  remaining  third,  a  large  body,  perhaps 
nearly  one-sixth  of  the  whole,  do  not  belong  to  the  visible 
Unity  of  the  Church.  If,  then,  the  one  only  Church  be 
the  one  only  way  of  salvation,  what  must  we  believe  of 
their  condition  before  God  ?  This  question  has  so  many 
aspects  and  so  many  shades  of  difference,  that  no  one 
general  answer  can  be  given.  We  must,  therefore,  care- 
fully distinguish  the  several  forms  of  the  question,  and 
reply  to  each  in  order. 

And,  first,  of  the  great  majority  of  mankind  to  whom 
this  way  of  salvation  has  never  been  proposed  at  all.  It 
is  plain  that  we  need  not  dwell  long  on  this  part  of  the 
subject.     This  mystery  in  the  dealings  of  God  is  a  stum- 

1)  Page  234. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  239 

bling-block  to  the  Deist  and  the  Infidel,  but  to  no  Cathohc 
Christian.  To  him,  indeed,  it  is  an  inscrutable  secret  at 
variance  with  his  own  anticipations.  But  Holy  Scrip- 
ture throws  light  enough,  if  it  be  only  athwart  the  diffi- 
culty, to  indicate  the  solution.  In  the  ages  before  Christ's 
coming,  it  is  evident  that  God  had  true  servants  known  to 
Himself  scattered  abroad  throughout  the  world.  Such 
was  the  condition  of  men  in  the  patriarchal  times  down 
to  the  call  of  Abraham.  And  after  this  peculiar  investi- 
ture of  one  family,  God  did  not  withdraw  himself  from 
men  of  other  nations.  The  history  of  Job  and  of  his 
friends  is  a  sufficient  proof  of  this.  The  vision  of  warn- 
ing to  Abimelech ;  the  dreams  of  Pharaoh  and  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, and  the  history  of  Balaam,  are  all  evidences 
that  God  held  communication  with  those  to  whom  He 
intrusted  no  formal  revelation  and  no  positive  institu- 
tions.' So  again  we  find  the  providential  government  of 
God  extended  over  the  kingdoms  of  the  heathen.  The 
prophet  Jeremiah  denounces  God's  punishment  against 
all  nations  that  would  not  serve  the  king  of  Babylon.'^ 
St.  Paul  also  asserts  that  the  Gentiles  were  "  a  law  unto 
themselves  ;"  and  that  they  should  be  judged  accordingly. 
The  difference  between  them  and  the  chosen  people  of 
God  seems  to  be  this.  To  the  Jews  was  intrusted  the 
office  of  transmitting  and  testifying  the  promise  of  a 
Saviour;  and  to  them  was  given  the  pledge  that  He 
should  be  born  of  their  lineage  after  the  flesh.  And  this 
St.  Paul  declares  when  he  answers  his  own  question: — 
"  What  advantage,  then,  hath  the  Jew,  or  what  profit  is 
there  of  circumcision  ?  Much  every  way.  Chiefly  be- 
cause that  unto  them  were  committed  the  oracles  of 
God."^  They  were  to  the  nations  what  the  tribe  of  Levi 
was  to  Israel,  the  bearers  and  keepers  of  the  Lord's  tab- 

1)  See  Newman's  History  of  the  Arians,  87—91. 

2)  Jerem.  xxvii.  8.  3)  Rom.  iii.  1,2. 


240        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

ernacle.  In  like  manner,  at  the  first  preaching  of  the 
Gospel,  St.  Paul  found  among  the  Gentiles  at  Antioch 
many  that  were  "disposed  to  eternal  life." ^  And  in  the 
city  of  Corinth  the  Lord  had  much  people.^  All  these 
things  strongly  support  the  assertion  of  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, already  quoted,  that  God  had  given  many  dispen- 
sations, one  to  the  Greeks,  one  to  the  Jews,  and  the  last 
to  Christians.  Now  although,  by  the  promulgation  of 
the  Gospel,  and  the  universal  commission  to  evangelize 
all  nations,  the  condition  of  the  Heathen  is  changed,  yet 
certainly  it  is  not  changed  for  the  worse.  Because  God 
has  intrusted  to  His  Church  some  better  thing  for  them, 
He  has  not  therefore  withdrawn  any  thing  they  before 
enjoyed.  We  may  assume  then,  at  least,  that  they  are 
as  before;  and  that  they,  whom  the  One  Church  has 
never  gathered  into  her  precinct,  may  j^et  be  drawn  by 
the  One  Great  Spirit,  and  saved  by  the  unseen  virtue  of 
the  One  Great  Sacrifice.  There  is  nothing  in  Holy 
Scripture  warranting  us  to  believe  that  the  benefit  of  the 
atonement,  offered  for  the  sin  of  the  world,  is  necessarily 
restricted  to  those  who  have  explicit  offers  of  salvation. 
It  is  revealed,  indeed,  that  there  is  no  other  meritorious 
cause  of  salvation  than  the  blood-shedding  of  Christ  alone ; 
but  we  are  not  told  that  the  relation  towards  God  even  of 
those  that  never  come  to  a  knowledge  of  redemption  may 
not  be  altogether  changed.  But  although  we  may  have 
this  hope,  the  Church  is  no  less  bound  to  go  forth  and 
preach  to  them  the  one  faith,  and  the  only  salvation  in 
the  one  Church  of  Christ,  than  if  God  had  openly  reveal- 
ed what  He  has  absolutely  kept  secret  from  us — I  mean, 
the  rule  of  his  dealings  with  them.  We  may  hope  that 
they  may  be  saved  ;  but  we  do  not  know  the  manner  or 
the  conditions  of  their  salvation.  We  know  one  only 
way ;  and  that  they  have  not.    We  know  that  there  is 

1)   Acts  xiii.  48,  Teraynivoi.  2)  Acts  xviii.'lO, 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        241 

"none  other  name  under  heaven  given  among  men 
whereby  we  must  be  saved :"  that  "  there  is  one  God, 
and  one  Mediator  between  God  and  man,  the  man  Christ 
Jesus:"  that  the  ministry  of  reconcihation  was  committed 
to  the  one  Church;  to  which  "the  Lord  added  daily 
such  as  should  be  saved."  But  beyond  this  nothing  is 
revealed. 

We  may  now  pass  on  to  those  with  whom  we  are 
chiefly  concerned,  namely,  such  as  have  had  the  One 
Church  sufficiently  proposed  to  them.  And  of  these  there 
are  two  classes :  the  one,  of  those  who  at  once  and  for 
ever  reject  the  salvation  offered  to  them ;  the  other,  of 
those  who  for  a  time  receive  it,  i.  e.,  they  who  are  never 
at  all  in  the  One  Church,  and  they  who,  having  been 
members  of  it,  afterwards  depart  from  its  unity.  Now  St. 
John  the  Baptist  has  declared :  "  He  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  hath  everlasting  life  ;  and  he  that  believeth  not 
the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth 
on  him."^  And  St.  John  the  Evangehst:  "  He  that  hath 
the  Son  hath  life,  and  he  that  haih  not  the  Son  of  God 
hath  not  life."^  And  our  Blessed  Lord  Himself:  "  He 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;  and  he  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned."^ 

We  may  apply  this  rule,  first,  to  those  who  have 
never  at  all  entered  the  One  Church,  even  though  suffi- 
ciently proposed  to  them.  Such  were  the  unbelieving 
Jews  and  Heathens  in  the  beginning,  and  at  this  day. 
They  rejected  the  whole  mystery  of  Christ,  both  the  One 
Sacrifice  and  the  One  Church;  and  their  rejection  was 
an  act  of  direct  energetic  opposition  to  the  will  of  God. 
Whether  or  not  any  such  shall  be  delivered  from  the 
wrath  to  come  we  know  not.  God  has  revealed  nothing 
more  than  we  have  recited  above,  and  that  has  an  awful 
aspect.     He  that  perfectly  knows  man's  moral  state  will 

1)   St.  John  iii.  36.  2)   1  St.  John  v.  12.  3)  St.  Mark  xvi.  16. 


242         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

unerringly  discern  the  shades  of  moral  incapacity,  indis. 
position,  and  resistance.  He  will  adjust  the  award  ac- 
cording to  the  probation  of  each,  who,  to  the  eyes  of  men, 
seem  to  have  failed  in  the  trial.  And  here  we  may  leave 
this  subject. 

Our  chief  difficulty  lies  in  the  case  of  those  who  have 
been  members  of  the  One  Church,  but  are  again  sepa- 
rate from  it.  And  of  these  there  are  many  classes.  There 
are  some  whose  separation  may  be  said  to  be  involuntary, 
such  as  persons  excommunicated  by  an  act  of  the  Church 
herself;  and  catechumens  who  are  as  yet  kept  without 
by  her  authority  ;  and  others,  whose  separation  is  volun- 
tary, such  as  heretics  and  schismatics,  who  sever  them- 
selves by  an  act  of  their  own. 

Now  of  excommunicate  persons,  also,  there  are  many 
grades,  such  as  those  who  are  finally  and  for  ever  cut 
off  from  the  Unity  of  the  Ciiurch  for  the  greatness  or  the 
iteration  of  their  sins.  Of  such  the  Church  pronounces 
that  she  is  unable  any  more  to  assure  them  of  God's 
mercy ;  and  so  she  leaves  them  to  God's  inscrutable 
judgment :  such  again  are  those  whose  separation  is  of  a 
corrective  or  penitential  kind,  being  terminable  and  with 
a  view  to  restoration,  after  one,  five,  ten,  twenty  years,  or 
by  the  communication  of  the  Holy  Eucharist  even  on  a 
death-bed.^  In  all  these  cases  the  Church  by  her  act 
indicates  hope  "  that  the  spirit  may  be  saved  in  the  day 
of  the  Lord  Jesus. "^  Indeed,  all  such  persons  may  be 
said  to  belong  to  the  Unity  of  the  Church,  though  the 
enjoyment  of  their  inheritance  is  for  their  chastisement 
suspended,  as  Canaan  was  the  inheritance  of  the  Jews, 
when,  for  their  unbelief,  they  were  turned  back  to  wander 
forty  years  in  the  wilderness.  Of  catechumens,  also,  it 
may  be  believed  that  they  are  in  the  Church  in  desire 
and  intention,  though  not  in  fact,  and,  dying  in  that  state, 

1)  Bingham,  Orig.  Eccl.  B.  xix.  c.  i.  s.  3.  2)   1  Cor.  v.  5. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        243 

shall  as  surely  be  saved'  as  the  penitent  thief  to  whom 
the  sacrament  of  regeneration,  through  the  impossibihty 
of  the  case,  was  wanting.^ 

We  now  come  to  those  wliose  separation  is  volun- 
tary. 

And  first  of  heretics.  The  matter  of  heresy  is  denial 
of  the  faith :  the  form  of  it  a  pertinacious  denial  after 
sufficient  admonition.  It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  errors 
in  doctrine  are  not  necessarily  heretical :  for  the  error 
may  be  in  some  mere  theological  opinion,  or  in  some 
point  undetermined  by  the  Church,  or,  even  if  deter- 
mined, through  error  of  fact  in  the  man  who  denies  it.^ 
The  matter  of  heresy,  therefore,  maybe  said  to  be  denial 
of  the  Baptismal  Creed,  or  any  part  of  it,  on  condition  of 
believing  which  a  man  is  made  partaker  of  Christ  in 
baptism,  and  a  member  of  the  Cathohc  Church.^  It  is 
evident,  also,  that  a  man  through  error  of  fact,  or  through 
want  of  right  knowledge,  for  the  communication  of  which 
others  are  responsible,  may  hold  erroneously  some  arti- 
cles even  of  the  Baptismal  Creed.  Yet  if  he  hold  them 
to  himself  he  is  no  heretic.^  So  asain  even  though  he 
propound  his  error,  yet,  if  not  sufficiently  admonished  by 
the  Church,  he  is  no  heretic  :^  nor  even  if,  when  admon- 
ished, he  should  without  pertinacity,  or  persevering  in 
the  publication  of  his  error,  remain  in  confusion  and  per- 
plexity.'' But  after  separating  off  all  these  several  gra- 
dations of  error,  there  will  yet  remain  the  pertinacious 
denial  of  the  baptismal  faith,  after  due  admonition,  which 

1)  Bellarmm.  de  Ecclesia  milit.  lib.  iii.  c.  3, 5. 

2)  S.  Aug,  de  Baptismo,  lib.  iv.  xxii,  xxiii. 

3)  Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Cbuicb,  vol.  i.  pp.  104,  108. 

4)  Laud's  Coaference  with  Fisher,  p.  27,  fol.  1686.        5)  lb.  pp.  20.5, 201. 

6)  S.  Aug.de  Bapt.  coatra  Donat. :  "  Lstum  nondum  haereticum  dice, 
nisi  manifestata  sibl  doctrina  Catholicse  fidei  resistere  maluerit,"  lib.  iv. 
xvi. 

7)  S.  Aug.  Ep.  xliii.  torn.  ii.  88,  ed.  Ben. 


244         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

is  both  material  and  formal  heresy,  and  is  equivalent  in 
its  moral  character  to  an  original  rejection  of  Baptism, 
which  on  the  condition  of  that  profession  was  at  the  first 
administered.  The  heretic  puts  himself  into  a  state  in 
which  the  Church  would  have  been  bound  to  refuse  the 
Sacrament  of  Holy  Baptism.  Even  Simon  Magus  be- 
lieved or  professed  to  believe  according  to  the  tenour  of  this 
necessary  condition.  Heresy  is  therefore  an  active  oppo- 
sition to  the  authority  of  the  Church  of  God  as  a  teacher 
of  Divine  truth. 

The  other  class  we  have  to  consider  are  schismatics. 
And  this  is  a  far  simpler  question,  for  schism  consists 
not  so  much  in  an  intention  as  in  a  matter  of  fact.  There 
are,  it  may  be,  men  of  a  temper  far  more  schismatical 
in  the  Unity  of  the  Church  than  in  a  state  of  separation 
from  it;  for,  indeed,  the  ultimate  and  highest  form  of 
schism  is  an  energetic  opposition  to  the  authority  of 
God  ruling  in  His  Church.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to 
suppose  that  every  act  of  schism  is  prompted  by  such  a 
conscious  temper ;  though  in  all  cases  it  is  involved 
implicitly  in  the  fact,  be  the  agent  never  so  unconscious. 
The  proximate  motive,  however,  is  often  some  inferior 
form  of  indocility,  impatience,  resentment  against  the 
person  of  those  that  bear  authority,  self-elation,  mortified 
vanity,  and  the  like.  Nevertheless,  whatsoever  may  be 
the  motive  in  the  heart  of  the  separatist,  his  act  is  a 
visible  rending  of  a  visible  unity,  and  as  such  is  in  all 
cases  schismatical.  By  its  very  nature  it  cannot  be  latent, 
as  heresy:  it  promulges  itself  in  its  first  beginnings;  and 
publicity  is  inseparable  from  its  continuance.  When  a 
man  ceases  to  show  himself  in  places  of  schismatical 
worship  and  conference,  he  has,  in  all  exterior  senses, 
ceased  to  be  a  schismatic;  and  the  active  habit  of  schism 
is  at  an  end.  So  long  as  it  is  continued,  the  man  as 
fully  deprives  himself  of  the  Sacraments  of  Christ  as  if 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  245 

he  had  never  entered  the  Catholic  Church.  He  cuts  off 
the  ordained  channels  of  grace  between  Christ  and  his 
soul  as  absolutely  as  if  he  had  never  drawn  nigh  to 
them.  He  has  proclaimed,  so  far  as  his  individual  acts 
avail,  an  entire  suspension  of  intercourse  between  heaven 
and  earth.  It  is  not  necessary  that  I  should  speak  of  the 
moral  evil  which  flows  as  a  consequence  from  his  act. 
We  are  concerned  with  his  personal  state  alone.  All 
that  we  can  say  is,  that  we  know  of  no  way  by  which  he 
can  be  saved  but  through  the  Church  only,  and  that 
this  way  he  has  rejected.  We  have  already  seen  how 
strongly  and  broadly  the  Catholic  doctrine,  that  out  of 
the  one  Church  there  is  no  salvation,  was  taught  in  the 
first  ages. 

It  is  always  to  be  observed  that  this  is  a  declaration, 
not  a  judicial  doctrine.  It  testifies  affirmatively  the 
Revelation  of  God,  but  does  not  venture  to  decide  the 
ultimate  award  of  any  living  soul.  All  that  it  declares 
is,  that  out  of  the  Church  there  is  no  revealed  way  of 
salvation.  It  does  not  say  that  there  is  no  inscrutable 
working  of  God's  Spirit,  no  actual  saving  of  moral  beings. 
The  Catholic  sense  of  this  doctrine  may  be  expressed  in 
the  following  propositions: — 

First.  That  God  has  revealed  no  other  way  of  salva- 
tion but  by  faith  in  Christ. 

Secondly.  That  He  has  committed  the  ministry  of 
reconciliation,  that  is,  of  interceding  with  Him,  and  of 
assuring  mankind  of  pardon,  to  no  other  body  than  the 
one  Church. 

Thirdly.  That  to  no  other  body  on  earth  has  been 
intrusted  a  Divine  commission  to  witness  the  mysteries 
of  Revelation,  or  to  administer  the  Sacraments  of  Grace. 

Fourthly.  That  no  other  body  is  ordained  of  God  to 
be  the  moral  discipline  restoring  the  Divine  image  to  the 
soul  of  man. 


246        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Fifthly.  That  no  other  body  on  earth  is  divinely  set 
for  the  moral  probation,  for  the  rising  and  falling  of 
mankind. 

And  lastly.  As  a  consequence  from  all  these,  that 
they  who  separate  themselves  from  it,  separate  them- 
selves from  the  way  of  probation,  the  moral  discipline, 
the  Sacraments  of  grace,  the  witness  of  truth,  the  min- 
istry of  reconciliation,  and  the  only  revealed  way  of 
partaking  in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ. 

This  will  be  more  simply  evident  if  we  consider  that 
faith  in  Christ  is  a  moral  and  practical  habit ;  that  the 
Unity  of  the  Church  is  the  line  of  obedience  marked  out 
by  Christ  for  our  faith  to  follow.  And  faith  without 
obedience  is  a  moral  contradiction.  And  here  we  may 
take  a  distinction  recognized  by  Catholic  writers,  and  most 
expressly  taught  by  St.  Augustin,  namely,  that  there  is 
a  difference,  perceptible  to  the  moral  judgment,  though 
not  to  the  senses,  between  the  Catholic  Church  and  the 
mystical  body  of  Christ.  It  must  not  for  a  moment  be 
supposed  that  this  distinction  in  any  way  countenances 
the  error  of  those  who  have  fancied  to  themselves  a 
visible  and  an  invisible  Church  on  earth,  so  as  in  effect 
to  divide  the  One  Church  into  two.^  The  distinction 
above  made  is  between  things  distinguishable  but  not 
divided  (entia  interdistincta  sed  indivisa),  as  the  body 
and  soul  of  an  individual  man,  or  the  symbol  and  grace 
of  a  sacrament,  or  a  moral  nature  and  a  moral  habit. 
The  visible  Church  is  the  one  body  of  men  united  by  the 
profession  of  the  same  faith,  and  by  communion  in  the 
same  sacraments,  under  the  jurisdiction  of  their  lawful 
pastors.^  In  this  definition  there  are  three  parts.  By 
the  profession  of  a  true  faith  all  Heathens,  Jews,  and 
Heretics  are  excluded ;  by  the  communion  of  sacraments 

1)  Field  on  the  Church,  b.  i.  c.  10' 

2)  Bellarm.  do  defin.  Eccl.  lib.  iii.  2,  9. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        247 

all  excommunicated  persons  and  catechumens  not  yet 
admitted  ;  by  the  jurisdiction  of  lawful  pastors  all  schis- 
matics, even  though  they  hold  to  the  doctrines  of  Chris- 
tianity. There  are  included  in  the  definition  all  other 
persons,  even  though  they  be  evil  and  reprobate  men. 
Therefore  no  internal  virtues  are  required  to  constitute 
any  man  a  member  of  the  One  Church,  but  only  an  ex- 
ternal profession  of  the  faith,  a  participation  in  the  sacra- 
ments, and  a  subjection  to  the  lawful  jurisdiction  of  the 
Church.  The  Church,  therefore,  is  a  body  of  men  visi- 
ble and  palpable  as  the  body  of  the  Roman  people,  or 
the  kingdom  of  France,  or  the  republic  of  Venice.^  And 
yet,  though  no  internal  virtues  are  required  to  constitute 
any  man  a  member  of  the  One  Church,  all  graces  and 
virtues,  such  as  faith,  hope,  and  charity,  are  enshrined 
in  the  Church;  but  not  so  as  to  constitute  a  Church 
within  a  Church,  so  making  two,  but  as  parts  or  proper- 
ties of  the  One  Church.  The  distinction,  then,  taken 
by  St.  Augustin  is  as  follows  : — "  That  the  Church  is  a 
living  S3^stem  in  which  there  is  soul  and  body ;  the  soul 
is  the  inward  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  faith,  hope,  charity, 
&c. ;  the  body  the  external  profession  of  the  faith  and 
participation  of  the  sacraments.  Whence  it  follows  that 
some  belong  both  to  the  soul  and  to  the  body  of  the 
Church,  and  so  are  united  to  Christ  the  head  both  out- 
wardly and  inwardly,  and  they  belong  to  the  Church  in 
the  most  perfect  manner ;  for  they  are,  as  it  were,  living 
members  in  the  body,  although  they  partake,  some  more 
and  some  less,  of  life,  and  some  have  only  so  much  as 
the  beginning  of  life,  having,  as  it  were,  sense  but  not  mo- 
tion, such,  for  instance,  as  have  only  faith  without  charity. 
Again,  some  are  of  tho  soul,  but  not  of  the  body,  as  cate- 
chumens, and  excommunicate  persons,  if  they  have  faith 

1)  Bellarm.  de  defin.  Eccl.  sect.  10. 


248        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

and  charity,  which  is  possible.  Lastly,  some  are  of  the 
body  and  not  of  the  soul,  as  they  who  have  no  inward 
virtue,  and  yet  from  some  hope  or  worldly  fear  profess 
the  faith  and  communicate  in  the  sacraments  under  the 
jurisdiction  of  lawful  pastors."'  And  these  are  as  dis- 
eases, or  bad  humours  in  the  human  body.  The  rule 
drawn  from  this  distinction  by  St.  Augustin  may  be  col- 
lected from  the  following  passages.  Speaking  of  the 
mixture  of  good  and  evil  men  in  the  visible  Church,  and 
correcting  an  unexact  mode  of  defining  it,  he  says : 
"  This  rule  may  be  called  the  rule  concerning  the  mixed 
Church  ;  which  rule  demands  a  watchful  reader,  when 
Scripture,  although  it  is  already  speaking  to  others,  seems 
still  to  speak  to  those  whom  it  was  before  addressing, 
or  concerning  those  of  whom  it  was  before  speaking,  as  if 
the  body  of  both  sorts  were  one  by  reason  of  the  com- 
mixture in  this  life  and  joint  participation  of  the  sacra- 
ments.'"^ "  That  Church  which  has  now  a  mixture  of  evil 
men  is  not  different  from  the  kingdom  of  God,  where 
there  shall  be  no  admixture  of  the  wicked,  but  one  and 
the  very  same  holy  Church  now  under  one,  hereafter 
under  another  condition,  now  having  evil  men  mingled  in 
it,  then  having  none;  as  now  it  is  mortal,  because  made 
np  of  mortal  men,  then  immortal,  because  there  shall  be 
in  it  no  one  who  can  die,  even  so  much  as  after  the  flesh, 
any  more ;  as  there  are  not  therefore  two  Christs",  be- 
cause He  first  died  and  afterwards  dieth  no  more.  The 
same  way  of  speaking  is  used  of  the  outward  and  inward 
man,  which  though  they  be  diverse,  cannot  be  called  two 
men :  how  much  less  can  it  be  called  two  Churches 


1)  Bellarm.  de  defin.  Eccl.  sect.  ii.  Bellarmin  refers  only  to  the  Brc- 
viculus  Collationis,  &c.,  No.  3,  where  indeed  this  doctrine  is  strongly 
affirmed.  It  is,  however,  much  more  clearly  and  variously  illustrated  in 
St.  Augustin's  other  works  against  the  Donatists,  as  cited  in  the  text. 

2)  De  doctrina  Christiana,  lib.  iii.  c.  32. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  249 

when  iheyare  the  very  same  saints  who  now  endure  the 
wicked,  who  are  mingled  with  them,  and  die  to  rise  again; 
but  then  shall  have  no  wicked  mingled  with  them,  and 
shall  never  die  any  more."^  "  In  the  Song  of  Songs  the 
Church  is  thus  described:  'A  garden  enclosed,  my  sis- 
ter, my  spouse,  a  fountain  sealed,  a  well  of  living  water, 
a  Paradise  with  the  fruit  of  apples.'  This  I  dare  not  un- 
derstand, save  of  the  holy  and  just,  not  of  the  covetous, 
and  fraudulent,  and  thieves,  and  usurers,  and  drunkards, 
and  envious  men,  who,  nevertheless,  have  a  common 
baptism  with  the  just,  with  whom  they  have  not  a  common 

charity Are  these  then  the  thorns  in  the  midst  of 

which  she  (the  beloved)  is  as  a  lily,  as  is  said  in  the  same 
Song  7  In  so  far  as  she  is  a  lily,  she  is  also  a  garden 
enclosed,  and  a  fountain  sealed :  that  is,  in  those  just  ones 
who  are  Jews  in  secret  by  the  circumcision  of  the  heart, 
(for  all  the  beauty  of  the  King's  daughter  is  within,)  in 
whom  is  the  certain  number  of  saints  predestined  before 

the  world  was  made There  are  also  some  even  of 

that  number  who  still  live  wickedly,  or  lie  sunk  in  here- 
sies and  heathen  superstitions,  and  yet  even  there  '  the 
Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  His ;'  for  in  that  infallible 
foreknowledge   of  God,   many  who   seem  without   are 
within,  and  many  who  seem  within  are  without.     Of  all 
those  therefore  who,  so  to  speak,  are  inwardly  and  in 
secret  within,  consists  that  '  garden  enclosed,  that  foun- 
tain sealed,  that  well  of  living  water,  that  Paradise  with 
the  fruit  of  apples.'     To  these   belong  the  gifts  vouch- 
safed of  God,  in  part  exclusively,  as  in  this  world  un- 
wearied charity,  and  in  the  world  to  come  life  everlast- 
ing ;  but,  in  part,  in  common  with  the  evil  and  perverse, 
as  all  other  gifts,  among  which  are  also  the  Holy  myste- 
ries."^    Speaking  of  those  who  had  received  Baptism 

1)  Brevic.  Coll.  cont.  Don.  iii.  x. 

2)  De  Bapt.  contra  Don.  lib.  v.  xxvii.  and  vi.  iii. 

12 


250         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

among  heretics,  and  were  afterwards  reconciled  to  the 
Church,  he  says,  "  It  may  therefore  be  that  some  who 
are  baptized  without,  through  the  foreknowledge  of  God, 
are  reputed  rather  as  baptized  within,  because  there 
(i.  e.,  in  the  Church)  the  water  first  began  to  avail  for 
iheir  salvation ;  for  neither  in  any  other  way  can  they 
be  said  to  be  saved  in  the  ark  but  by  water.  And  again, 
some  who  seem  lo  be  baptized  within,  by  the  same  fore- 
knowledge of  God,  are  more  truly  reputed  to  be  baptized 
without ;  forasmuch  as,  through  abuse  of  Baptism,  they 
perish  by  water,  which  then  befell  none  but  those  that 
were  without  the  ark.  Certainly  it  is  plain  that  what  is 
said  of  within  and  without  in  the  Church,  must  be  under- 
stood of  the  heart,  not  of  the  body  ;  forasmuch  as  all  who 
are  within  in  heart  are  saved  in  the  unity  of  the  ark  by 
the  same  water,  by  which  all  who  are  without  in  heart, 
whether  without  in  body  also  or  not,  perish  as  enemies  of 
unity." ^  So  in  another  place : — "  According  to  His  fore- 
knowledge, who  knoweth  whom  He  predestinated  before 
the  world  was  made,  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  His 
Son,  many  also  who  are  openly  without,  and  are  called 
heretics,  are  better  than  many,  and  they  good  Catho- 
lics."^ And  again: — "According  to  the  foreknowledge 
of  God,  as  many  sheep  wander  without,  so  many  wolves 
prowl  within."^  I  will  add  only  one  more  most  remark- 
able passage,  which  will  complete  our  outline  of  St.  Au- 
gustin's  distinction.  On  the  10th  chapter  of  St.  John  he 
says,  "  According  to  the  foreknowledge  and  predestina- 
tion of  God,  how  many  sheep  are  without,  how  many 
wolves  within ;  and  how  man)'-  sheep  within,  how  many 
wolves  without.  What  did  I  say  ?  How  many  sheep 
without !  How  many  now  hve  in  sensuality  who  shall 
be  chaste  -,  how  many  blaspheme  Christ  who  shall  be- 

1)  De  Bapt.  contra  Don.  v,  xxviii.  2)  Do  Bapt.  iv.  iii. 

3)  Ibid.  lib.  vi.  1. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        251 

lieve  in  Christ;  how  many  drink  themselves  drunken 
who  shall  be  sober;  how  many  rob  others  of  their  goods 
who  shall  give  away  their  own  :  but  now  for  a  time  ihey 
hear  the  voice  of  others,  and  follow  others.  Also,  how 
many  within  give  praise  who  shall  blaspheme;  are 
chaste,  who  shall  defile  themselves  ;  are  sober,  who  shall 
drown  themselves  in  drink  ;  who  stand,  but  shall  fall : 
they  are  not  sheep."  ^ 

Now,  upon  these  passages  we  may  observe, — 

First,  that  St.  Augustin  contrasts  the  diametrical  moral 
opposites  of  good  and  evil  men  within  and  without  the 
Church. 

Secondly,  that  he  contrasts,  with  equal  clearness,  the 
diametrical  opposition  of  the  visible  state  of  those  that 
are  or  are  not  members  of  the  Church.  Good  and  evil 
are  not  more  contrasted  by  him  than  within  and  without. 

Thirdly,  that  he  also  uses  the  terms  "  within"  and 
"  without"  in  a  figurative  sense,  i.  e.,  in  heart,  but  not  in 
body  :  "  corde  sed  non  corpore.''^ 

Fourthly,  that  he  recognizes  within  the  visible  Church 
an  invisible  communion  of  saints. 

And,  lastly,  that  he  believed  in  a  moral  Providence 
working  out  the  predestinated  results  of  the  foreseen  pro- 
bation of  man. 

Now  all  this  may  be  resolved,  up  into  the  one  principle 
already  insisted  on,  namely,  that  the  one  visible  Church 
is  of  the  nature  of  a  sacrament,  both  representing  and 
making  men  partakers  of  the  salvation  which  is  in  Christ, 
namely,  forgiveness  through  his  blood-shedding  and  res- 
toration to  His  image.  The  distinction,  therefore,  be- 
tween the  visible  Church  and  the  invisible  communion  of 
saints  is  no  more  than  the  distinction  between  potentiality 
and  actuality.     All  members  of  the  visible  Church  are 

1)   In  S.  Joan.  Ev.  ex.  line  iii.  pt.  ii.  600. 


252  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH, 

regenerate  in  holy  baptism;  they  are  in  the  first  disposi- 
tion towards  the  mind  of  Christ ;  they  are  saints  in  posse. 
Even  those  whose  lives  are  openly  profane  and  evil,  until 
in  God's  mysterious  economy  of  probation  they  justly 
forfeit  the  capability  of  recovery,'  are  of  the  nature  of 
saints.  I  say  of  the  nature,  because  though  they  are  ca- 
pable of  the  energies  and  habits  of  holiness,  they  do  not 
possess  them.  They  hold  tlieir  capabiHty  in  unright- 
eousness; but  they  who  by  docile  following  of  the  Spirit 
of  God  become  holy  in  energy  and  habit,  are  saints 
in  esse,  in  realized  and  actual  holiness.  They  are  one 
with  Christ  by  a  conscious  moral  choice,  by  the  deliber- 
ate election  of  the  conscience,  and  by  the  fast  cleaving  of 
the  heart.  Their  wills  are  energetically  one  with  His 
will ;  and  they  are  partakers  of  an  incorporation  and 
co-adanation  of  body,  soul,  and  spirit,  which  trans- 
cends the  sense  and  understanding.  To  take,  once 
more,  an  illustration  often  used  already.  The  one  visi- 
ble Church  is  to  this  invisible  communion  what  the  visi- 
ble partakers  of  the  blessed  Eucharist  are  to  the  invisible 
fellowship  of  those  who  verily  and  indeed  receive  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ :  they  are  the  elect  fruit  of  the 
elect  vine,  the  ripeness  of  the  regenerate  seed.  And  this 
blessed  company  make  up  the  true  mystical  body  of 
Christ,*^  of  which  the  visible  Church  is  but  the  symbol 
and  ministrative  cause,  subordinate  to  the  Spirit  of  God. 
We  have  now  made  good  a  distinction  which  will  serve 
as  a  principle  to  adjust  in  some  measure  the  phenomena 
of  Christendom  with  the  doctrine  here  laid  down. 

We  must  revert  once  more  to  the  distinction  of  unity 
into  objective  and  subjective,  and  take  in  order  the  anom- 
alies which  are  found  without  and  within  the  Church  of 
Christ.     We  will  consider  first  the  case  of  those  who 

1)   Heb.  vi.  4,  5,  6. 

2;  Staplelon,  quoted  by  Field,  on  the  Church,  p.  17. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


253 


have  wholly  forfeited  the  objective  unity  both  in  doctrine 
and  disciphne;  then  of  those  who  have  made  a  partial 
forfeit ;  that  is,  first,  of  the  doctrine,  retaining  the  disci- 
phne, secondly,  of  the  discipline,  retaining  the  doctrine ; 
and  next,  the  state  of  those  who  have  retained  the  object- 
ive unity  both  in  doctrine  and  discipline,  but  have  lost  the 
subjective  unity  of  communion  and  intercourse. 


CHAPTER    II. 


THE    LOSS    OF    OBJECTIVE   UNITY. 


The  first  case  we  have  to  consider  is  the  case  of  those 
who  have  wholly  forfeited  the  objective  unity  both  of 
doctrine  and  disciphne.  Such,  for  instance,  are  the  sects 
who  have  rejected  the  mystery  of  the  proper  Godhead  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  and  those  who  have  rejected  the 
Holy  Sacraments. 

In  the  first  place  we  may  observe  that  these  sects  are 
not  necessarily  formal,  but  only  material,  heretics.  The 
first  originators  of  their  error  were  guilty  of  the  heresy 
and  the  schism ;  but  their  descendants  have  inherited 
their  actual  state  Avithout  partaking  necessarily  of  its 
moral  cause.  It  is,  indeed,  true  that,  as  each  man  grows 
up  to  the  full  development  of  his  personal  responsibility, 
he  may  appropriate  to  himself  the  act  of  his  forefathers 
by  his  own  direct  conscious  act  of  moral  consent  and 
choice.  He  may  also  pertinaciously  defend  his  error 
against  sufficient  admonition.  But  it  is  possible — indeed, 
almost  certain — that  among  the  descendants  of  the  first 
propounders  of  the  delusion,  there  are  many  whose  moral 
nature  has  never  been  exercised  by  any  form  of  proba- 
tion in  the  matter  of  their  error.  At  every  remove  from 
the  first  impulse  the  momentum  of  active  participation 
declined.    In  a  few  generations  it  was  exhausted  ;  and 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  255  , 

their  successors  inherited  a  corrupt  tradition,  rather  with 
passive  acquiescence  than  with  conscious  approval.  By 
this  involuntary  apostacy  a  grave  injury  was  inflicted  on 
their  moral  being.  The  bias  of  their  mind  was  insensi- 
bly and  involuntarily  determined  to  a  false  idea.  Their 
free  disposition,  which  should  have  been  reserved  for  the 
impressions  of  truth,  was  pre-occupied  by  error;  and 
their  intellectual  nature  received  false  stamps  and  char- 
acters, and  erroneous  inclinations.  No  one  can  say  how 
deep  and  lasting  an  injury  is  wrought  in  the  texture  of 
the  human  mind,  when  its  first  action  is  to  coalesce  with 
delusion  and  falsehood.  It  seems  to  sear  and  to  distort 
it  almost  beyond  recovery.  With  this  moral  indisposi- 
tion come  also  intellectual  hinderances.  The  constant  ac- 
tion of  a  false  system,  and  the  absolute  exclusion  of  truth, 
make  ignorance  invincible.  Oftentimes  they  may  have 
never  heard  a  surmise  of  any  form  of  truth  except  their 
own  inherited  belief;  or  they  have  heard  of  it  only  with 
contempt  and  opposition.  Their  better  feelings  are  en- 
listed in  a  warfare  against  truth,  conceived  to  be  false- 
hood. All  these  are  mitigating  pleas  in  their  moral  pro- 
bation. Add  to  these  the  spiritual  penury  to  which  they 
were  born,  the  moral  destitution  of  their  fathers'  home  ; 
no  witness  for  truth,  no  sacraments  of  grace,  no  gentle 
suasion,  and  moulding  pressure  of  a  spiritual  discipline ; 
and  there  can  hardly  be  conceived  an  immortal  being  in 
a  state  more  impoverished  and  desolate. 

Now,  nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that  among 
such  sects  there  are  to  be  found  many  approximations  to 
the  reality  of  Christian  life.  We  find  a  solid  morality, 
a  great  love  of  truth  so  far  as  it  is  known,  real  self-denial, 
energy  and  zeal  in  works  of  benevolence,  and  upright- 
ness of  conscience  before  God.  Of  these  there  are 
abundant  instances ;  so  many  and  so  visible,  indeed,  as 
to  betray  some  minds,  more  active  than  enlarged,  into  a 


256  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

theory  that  the  common  measure  of  every- day  tempta- 
tions is  reduced  in  their  case  by  the  Enemy  of  Truth, 
whose  cause  their  very  virtues  tend  to  serve.  Although 
this  may  be  among  his  arch-devices,  yet  it  will  not  ac- 
count for  the  undeniable  forms  of  obedience  in  those  who 
escape  from  his  dominion.  There  can  be  but  one  only 
Author  of  good  in  them ;  that  is,  the  same  who  out  of 
the  moral  anarchy  even  of  the  regenerate  educes  the 
unseen  unity  of  saints.  Wheresoever  we  see  forms  of 
Christian  obedience  among  those  who  have  lost  the  doc- 
trine and  discipline  of  the  Church,  they  are  so  many 
moral  miracles:  they  are  revelations  in  fact ;  which  are, 
therefore,  no  way  contrary  to  God's  revelation  in  icord. 
He  has  promised  to  sanctify  man  through  His  Church ; 
He  has  not  declared  that  He  will  sanctify  none  in  other 
ways.  Through  His  Church  we  know  both  the  condi- 
tions and  the  means  ;  beyond  His  Church  we  know  nei- 
ther :  yet  who  is  he  that  shall  deny  a  visible  fact  because 
he  cannot  see  how  God  has  done  it,  and  yet  believe  in 
sacraments  and  miracles  ?  The  wisdom  of  God  is  mani- 
fold ;  and  of  all  the  ways  of  bringing  about  the  same 
end,  He  has  revealed  but  one.  And  while  we  know  of 
no  other,  and  can  trust  ourselves  to  no  other,  and  daie 
teach  men  to  rely  on  no  other,  yet  we  may  well  believe 
He  has  reserved  many  more  ways  in  His  own  power. 
We  who  see  men  under  the  energy  of  God's  Spirit  with- 
out His  sacraments,  may  well  hope  that  they  shall  par- 
take of  salvation  without  His  Church.  It  is  in  accord- 
ance with  all  that  God  has  revealed  of  Himself  to  believe 
that,  in  His  moral  government  over  His  moral  creatures, 
He  proceeds  by  the  broad  rule  of  natural  equity,  on  which 
even  His  supernatural  economy  is  grounded ;  and  that 
the  virtues  of  the  one  all-atoning  Sacrifice  prevail  even  for 
those  who  by  no  act  of  their  own  have  been  disinherited 
of  their  portion  in  His  visible  Church.     That  they  belong 


THE    UNITY    OF   THE    CHURCH.  257 

to  the  body  of  the  Church  is  contrary  to  all  evidence 
and  testimony  of  the  Prophets,  Apostles,  and  of  Christ 
Himself  That  by  his  merciful  and  mysterious  working, 
who  knits  in  one  the  mystical  company  of  saints,  they 
are  made  unconscious  partakers  of  the  soul  of  the  one 
Church,  is  no  less  accordant  with  the  first  axioms  of  the 
illuminated  reason,  than  with  the  tender  mercies  of  God. 

We  must  now  consider  the  case  of  those  who  have 
forfeited  only  in  part  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church ; 
and  first,  those  who  have  in  part  forfeited  the  unity  of 
doctrine,  but  retained  the  discipline. 

The  Nestorian,  and  Monophysite,  and  Monothelite 
churches  in  Egypt,  Abyssinia,  Syria,  Armenia,  and  the 
East,  may  be  taken  as  instances.  These  churches  ceased 
to  communicate  with  the  Universal  Church  after  the 
Councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon.  The  forfeiture  of 
objective  doctrine  related  in  both  cases  to  the  mode  of  the 
Incarnation  of  our  Lord.  The  errors  were  both  of  a 
speculative  kind,  but  in  their  inferential  consequences  of  a 
practical  effect.  They  were  condemned  by  oecumenical 
synods,  and  pertinaciously  maintained  by  those  Churches ; 
and  the  result  was  a  breach  of  Communion.  What,  then, 
is  the  condition  of  these  bodies  ?  Do  they,  or  do  they 
not,  belong  to  the  One  Church  ?  They  forfeited  the  truth 
iti  one  primary  article  of  faith ;  but  they  retained  the 
Apostolical  Succession  of  orders,  and  the  transmitted 
power  to  perform  all  functions  contained  in  the  ministerial 
character.  Now  it  must  be  considered,  first,  that  the 
objective  unity  of  doctrine  and  discipline  is  a  deposit  in- 
truste;(i  by  Christ  to  His  Church  ;  and  "it  is  required  of 
stewards  that  a  man  be  found  faithful."^  It  is  the  pro- 
bation of  the  churches  that  they  should  keep  this  deposit 
whole  and  undenled.  The  Nestorian  and  Monophysite 
Churches  were  found  untrusty  in  one  leading  feature  of 

1)   1  Cor.  iv.  2. 

12* 


258  THE    UNITY    OP   THE    CHURCH. 

their  charge :  as  stewards  they  were  proved  unfaithful : 
they  were  condemned  by  the  judgment  of  the  CathoHc 
Church  ;  and  they  returned  this  sentence  by  anathema. 
Since  that  time  they  have  stood  aloof,  handing  on  un- 
changed the  tradition  of  a  mutilated  faith. 

As,  then,  the  being  of  the  Church  consists  in  an  ob- 
jective system,  instituted  and  ordained  of  God,  it  must  be 
admitted  that  these  churches,  by  forfeiting  one  portion 
of  it,  have  forfeited  their  inheritance  in  the  unity  of  the 
one  visible  body.  Their  condemnation,  and  the  suspen- 
sion of  communion  which  followed,  were  the  consequences 
of  their  forfeiture.  This,  and  not  what  may  be  called 
the  judicial  award,  is  the  cause  of  their  abscission.  So 
much  for  their  formal  condition. 

We  must  now  consider  their  moral  state.  It  in  no 
way  derogates  from  the  force  and  exactness  of  the  dogma 
that  in  the  One  Church  alone  there  is  salvation,  to  believe 
that  God  may  and  does  from  these  mutilated  churches 
gather  out  many  unto  everlasting  life.  The  reasons  of 
this  hope  or  judgment  of  the  heart  are  manifold  :  as, 
first,  that  one  of  the  moral  ends  of  the  Church  itself  is  the 
salvation  of  mankind.  We  may  well  believe,  therefore, 
that  the  merciful  purpose  of  God,  declared  in  the  election 
of  these  Eastern  nations  to  regeneration  through  His 
Church,  shall  not  be  wholly  turned  aside.  That  they 
were  once  members  of  the  One  Church  is  a  recorded 
witness  of  God's  good  will  towards  them.  And  can  we 
doubt  that  He  who  looked  in  mercy  on  Nineveh,  a  hea- 
then city,  and  Himself  pleaded  for  their  salvation  with 
his  over-zealous  prophet,  saying,  "  Thou  hast  had  pity  on 
the  gourd,  for  the  which  thou  hast  not  laboured,  neither 
madest  it  grow ;  which  came  up  in  a  night  and  perished 
in  a  night:  and  should  not  I  spare  Nineveh,  that  great 
city,  wherein  are  more  than  sixscore  thousand  persons 
that  cannot  discern  between  their  ri^ht  hand  and  their 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  259 

left  hand  ;  and  also  much  cattle  ?"^ — can  we  doubt,  I  say, 
that  He  who  chose  out  those  people  by  the  predestination 
of  His  grace  to  the  salvation  which  is  in  Christ,  who 
planted  and  tended  them  well  nigh  four  hundred  years, 
and  from  them  gathered  precious  fruits  in  their  season, 
should  still  look  with  a  steadfast  eye  of  mercy  on  the 
hundreds  of  thousands  among  them  who  could  not  dis- 
cern their  right  hand  from  their  left  f  First  it  must  be 
remembered  that,  in  the  original  breach,  the  responsible 
agents  were  those  to  whom  the  government  of  the 
churches  was  committed,  and  with  them  such  also  as 
consciously  partook  of  their  false  teaching  and  pertina- 
cious schism.  But  how  many  moral  beings,  children 
and  women,  simple  and  unlearned  people,  whose  chief 
sin  was  too  great  docility,  were  unconsciously  and  pass- 
ively involved  in  the  consequence  of  this  breach,  God 
alone  can  know.  We  are  forced  at  the  outset  to  beheve 
that  He  was  more  merciful  to  them  than  their  natural 
pastors.  It  is  the  light  of  faith  shining  in  the  reason 
that  leads  us  to  believe  that  multitudes  in  these  lapsed 
churches  yet  belonged,  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  to  the  soul  of 
the  one  true  Church :  they  belonged  to  it  in  preparation 
of  heart,  in  conscious  intention,  and  in  steadfast  though 
erroneous  belief. 

We  may  next  observe  that,  as  multitudes  were  guilt- 
lessly involved  in  the  first  breach,  so  their  children  were 
born  to  be  the  inheritors  of  a  state  which  was  not  imput- 
ed as  a  sin  even  to  their  parents ;  and  further,  that  of 
those  whose  forefathers  had  by  conscious  assent  become 
partakers  of  the  schism,  the  moral  state  was  widely  dif- 
ferent. The  sins  of  parents  cleave  to  their  children  in 
the  way  of  penal  consequence  ;  but  the  children  are  not 
necessarily  partakers  by  direct  moral  consent ;  they  may 
become  so,  and  often  do ;  but,  in  the  case  of  churches 

1)  Jonah  iv.  10,  11. 


260        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


1 


which  fall  as  landslips  from  the  Church  Universal,  there 
must  be,  in  all  ages,  many  who  represent  the  simple  and 
unlearned  of  the  first  generation  which  was  passively 
rent  from  the  visible  body ;  and  who  to  the  simplicity 
and  unlearned  docility  of  their  forefathers  add  the  accu- 
mulated unconsciousness  of  the  evils  which  attach  to  their 
inherited  condition.  If  there  be  any  truth  in  the  rule 
that  moral  guilt  grows  less  at  every  remove  from  the  first 
authors  of  a  schism,  it  must  hold  good  in  such  a  case. 

We  now  come  to  another  question  contained  in  this 
form  of  the  case,  namely,  whether  or  no  the  discipline 
which  is  retained  entire,  including  the  orders  and  sacra- 
ments of  Christ,  be  valid  and  effectual  to  the  engrafting 
of  men  into  Him  and  the  sustaining  of  communion  with 
Him  ?  The  negative  arguments  are  either  that  the 
apostolical  authority  is  annulled  by  heresy,  or  that  it  ia 
suspended  by  the  schism. 

Now  on  this  subject  the  judgment  and  practice  of  the 
Church  has  varied ;  and  by  its  variations  has  shown  that 
there  was  no  fixed  and  immutable  rule.  The  Greek 
Church  in  earlier  times  admitted  the  orders  of  heretics, 
whom  in  later  times  she  was  wont  to  reordain:  the  Latin 
Church  seems  almost  invariably  to  have  admitted  the 
orders  of  such  heretics  as  used  the  Catholic  rite,  and  had 
themselves  derived  orders  from  the  Church.'  Pope  Fehx 
was  ordained  by  Arians.^  In  the  East,  the  Nestorians, 
Eutychians,  Severians,  Jacobites,  and  Acephali  were  re- 
ceived upon  a  simple  condemnation  of  their  heresy  and 
its  author.  They  neither  rebaptized  nor  reordained 
them.^  Of  the  Nestorians  St.  Gregory  writes:  "  Let  them 
anathematize  Nestorius  with  all  his  followers,  and  other 
heretics :  let  them  promise  to  receive  also  the  venerable 

1)  Morinus  de  Sacr.  Ord.  pars  iii.  excrc.  v.  c.  xi.  sect.  5. 

2)  Mason's  Vindic.  of  the  Engl.  Min.  p.  154,  fol.  1728. 

3)  Morinus,  ib.  c.  xii.  s.  17. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  261 

gynods  which  the  Universal  Church  receives,  and  with- 
out douht  receive  them  into  the  Church,  preserving  to 
them  their  own  orders."'  So  also  were  the  Arians  re- 
ceived f  so  also  the  Pelagians  were  treated  by  the  judg- 
ment of  St.  Leo  ;^  so  also  were  the  Monolhelites  dealt 
with  by  the  seventh  synod.^  It  is  evident,  then,  that  the 
succession  and  orders  of  these  churches,  although  deemed 
unlawful  as  being  contrary  to  the  canons,  were  held  to 
be  valid  as  beiiig  conferred  by  men  validly  consecrated, 
and  by  a  rite  containing  all  things  essential  to  the  sacra- 
mental nature  of  holy  orders. 

Now  in  respect  to  baptism  the  question  is  of  an  easi- 
er kind.  After  the  great  controversy  respecting  schis- 
matical  baptism,  which  many  of  the  Eastern  Churches 
held  with  the  African  to  be  invalid,^  it  was  finally  ruled, 
in  the  West,  that  Baptism  conferred  with  the  right  form, 
matter,  and  intention,  was  to  be  accounted  valid. ^  This 
recognition  of  Baptism  did  not  involve  a  recognition  of 
orders  in  the  administrator.  Even  in  cases  where  the 
orders  were  held  to  be  null,  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism 
was  accepted.^  They  degraded  the  clergy,  but  received 
the  laity  with  the  chrism  only.  As  this  is  a  question  of 
some  moment,  it  maybe  well  to  state  explicitly  the  reason 
of  this  rule  as  it  is  given  by  St.  Augustin.  It  must  al- 
ways, however,  be  borne  in  mind  that  he  is  writing,  not 
of  laymen  but  of  those  who  had  derived  orders  from  the 
Cathohc  Church.  He  says,  "  that  the  Baptism  of  Christ 
cannot  be  annulled  by  any  perversity  of  man,  whether 
he  be  the  giver  or  the  receiver  of  it;"  and  immediately 
adds,  that  the  reason  why  the  bishops  or  pastors  in  St. 

1)  Morinus  de  Sacr.  c.  xi.  s.  1.        2)   S.  Hieiora.  Dial,  contr.  Lucif. 

3)  Morinus,  iii.  c.  x.  s.  8.  4)   lb.  c.  xi.  s.  2. 

5)  lb.  c.  xii.  s.  4,  5. 

6)  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  v.  c.  58.  s.  [3.]  ed.  Keble. 

7)  Courayer's  Defence  of  the  English  Ordinations,  pp.  294,295. 


262        THE  UNITY  OP  THE  CHURCH. 

Cyprian's  time  had  doubted  the  validity  of  the  Baptism 
given  by  lieretics  and  scliismatics  was  "  because  tlie 
Sacrament  was  not  distinguished  from  its  eflect  and  use. 
And  because  the  effect  and  use  of  the  Sacrament — name- 
ly, in  hberation  from  sins  and  uprightness  of  heart — was 
not  found  among  heretics,  the  Sacrament  itself  was 
thought  not  to  be  there.  But  when  they  turned  their  eyes 
to  the  multitude  of  chaff  within  the  Church,  they  also 
who,  in  the  unity  of  it  are  perverse  and  live  evil  lives, 
would  seem  neither  to  have  power  to  give,  nor  even  to 
have,  remission  of  sins,  because  not  to  the  evil,  but  to 
the  good  sons  it  was  said,  'whosesoever  sins  ye  remit, 
they  are  remitted  unto  him,  and  whosesoever  sins  ye 
retain,  they  are  retained ;'  it  was  sufficiently  clear  to 
the  pastors  of  the  Catholic  Church  diffused  throughout 
the  world,  by  whom  afterwards  the  original  custom  was 
confirmed  with  the  authority  of  a  plenary  council,  that 
they  nevertheless  may  have,  and  give,  and  receive  the 
Sacrament  of  Baptism  ;  that  also  a  sheep  which  was 
wandering  without,  and  had  received  the  Lord's  mark 
from  its  deceitful  spoilers  without,  when  it  comes  to  the 
salvation  of  Christian  unity,  is  to  be  corrected  of  its  error, 
freed  from  its  bondage,  healed  of  its  wound,  but  the 
Lord's  mark  upon  it  is  to  be  rather  acknowledged 
than  rejected,  forasmuch  as  many,  who  are  ostensibly 
within,  but  are  themselves  indeed  wolves,  imprint  ihe 
very  same  mark  upon  wolves  like  unto  themselves."^ 
And  a  little  after  he  adds,  "I  say  that  both  good 
and  bad  may  have,  may  give,  and  may  receive  the 
Sacrament  of  Baptism ;  the  good,  indeed,  usefully  and 
unto  health,  but  the  bad  hurtfully  and  penally,  since  that 
(the  Sacrament)  is  equally  perfect  in  each  ;  and  its  equal 
integrity  in  all  is  not  affected  by  how  much  worse  the 
man  may  be  who  has  it  among  the  evil,  as  neither  by 

1)  De  Bapt.  contra  Don.  vi.  1. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  263 

how  much  better  the  man  may  be  who  has  it  among  the 
good.  And  for  this  reason  it  is  not  affected  by  how 
much  worse  he  be  who  gives  it,  as  neither  by  how  much 
better ;  nor  by  how  much  worse  he  be  who  receives  it, 
as  neither  by  how  much  better ;  for  the  Sacrament  itself, 
both  in  those  that  are  not  equally  righteous  and  in  those 
that  are  not  equally  unrighteous,  is  itself  equally  holy."^ 
St.  Auguslin's  argument  is  this  :  the  unworthiness  of 
the  minister  does  not  destroy  the  integrity  of  the  Sacra- 
ment ;  there  are  wolves  within  as  without ;  heresy  and 
schism  without  the  Church  are  as  sin  and  an  evil  life 
within  it ;  as  these  do  not  annul  it,  so  neither  do  the 
other  faults.  But  he  is  speaking  of  ordained  men  in  both 
cases.  "  For  it  is  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism  which  he 
has  who  is  baptized,  and  it  is  the  Sacrament  of  confer- 
ring Baptism  which  he  has  who  is  ordained.  And  as  he 
who  is  baptized,  if  he  depart  from  unity,  does  not  lose 
the  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  so  he  that  is  ordained,  if  he 
depart  from  unity,  does  not  lose  the  Sacrament  of  con- 
ferring Baptism."^  "For  both  are  sacraments;  and  both 
are  given  to  man  with  a  certain  consecration ;  the  one 
when  he  is  baptized,  the  other  when  he  is  ordained  ;  and 
therefore  it  is  not  lawful  to  iterate  them  in  the  Catholic 
Church."^  "  But  if  it  (baptism)  may  be  had  out  of  the 
Church,  why  may  it  not  also  be  given  ?  If  you  say.  It  is 
not  rightly  given  out  of  the  Church,  we  answer.  As, 
though  it  be  not  rightly  had,  yet  it  is  had  ;  so,  though  it 
be  not  rightly  given  out  of  the  Church,  yet  it  is  given. 
But  as  by  reconciliation  to  unity  that  begins  to  be  had 
beneficially,  which  before  was  had  out  of  unity  without 
benefit ;  so  by  the  same  reconciliation  to  unity,  that 
begins  to  be  beneficial,  which  out  of  the  Church  was 
also  given  without  benefit.     It  is  not,  however,  right  to 

1)   De  Bapt.  contra  Don.  sect.  2.  2)  lb.  lib.  i.  c.  1. 

3)   Contra  lit.  Farm.  lib.  ii.  13. 


264        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

say  that  that  which  was  given  was  not  given,  or  that 
any  man  should  be  Avrongfully  said  not  to  have  given 
it,  when  it  is  confessed  that  he  gave  what  he  had  receiv- 
ed." He  pursues  this  explanation  still  further  in  the 
following  passage  : — "  As  the  union  of  bodies  is  by  con- 
tinuity of  place,  so  the  consent  of  wills  is  a  sort  of  contact 
of  minds.  If,  therefore,  a  man  who  departs  from  unity 
has  a  will  to  do  any  thing  other  than  that  which  he  re- 
ceived in  unity,  in  that  thing  he  departs,  and  is  separat- 
ed ;  but  whatsoever  he  desires  so  to  do,  as  it  is  done  in 
unity,  when  he  has  received  and  learned  it,  in  that  he 
abides  and  is  united.  Therefore  they  in  some  things 
are  with  us,  but  in  some  things  have  gone  out  from  us. 
Wherefore  those  things  in  which  they  are  with  us,  those 
we  do  not  forbid  them  to  perform  ;  but  in  those  wherein 
they  are  not  with  us,  we  exhort  them  to  come  that  they 
may  have,  to  return  that  they  may  recover  them.  We 
do  not  therefore  say  to  them, '  Do  not  administer'  (Imp- 
tisTn),  but  'Do  not  administer  it  in  schism;'  nor  to  those 
who  are  going  to  be  baptized,  '  Do  not  receive'  (baptism), 
but  'Do  not  receive  it  in  schism.' '"  And  afterwards,  in 
answer  to  the  Donatist  who  demanded  whether  or  no 
their  baptism  was  valid  to  beget  sons  to  God,  intending 
the  dilemma,  if  it  regenerate  then  ours  must  be  the  true 
Church ;  if  not,  then  why  do  not  Catholics  re-baptize 
those  whom  they  draw  away  from  us!  St.  Augustin 
says: — "As  if  it  (baptism)  had  the  power  of  regenera- 
tion in  that  point  wherein  it  is  separated,  and  not  in  that 
wherein  it  is  united.  For  it  is  separated  from  the  bond 
of  charity  and  peace,  but  it  is  joined  in  the  oneness  of 
Baptism.  Therelbre  it  is  the  one  Church  that  alone  is 
called  Catholic  ;  and  whatsoever  of  its  own  it  possesses  in 
the  communions  of  those  divine  bodies  who  are  separated 
from  its  unity,  through  that  which  it  has  of  its  own  in 

))  De  Bapt.  contra  Don.  lib.  i.  c.  1. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  265 

them,  it  does  itself  regenerate,  not  they.  For  it  is  not  their 
separation  which  regenerates,  but  that  which  they  have 
retained  among  themselves  from  the  Church,  which  if  they 
let  go  also,  they  do  not  regenerate  at  all.  The  Church, 
therefore,  whose  sacraments  are  retained,  regenerates  in 
all."^  And  the  ultimate  principle  of  their  judgment  he 
states  in  the  following  axiomatic  form  : — "  Like  as  bap- 
tism, so  do  orders  remain  perfect  in  them ;  because  the 
fault  was  in  the  separation,  which,  by  the  peace  of  unity, 
was  corrected  ;  not  in  the  Sacraments,  which,  whereso- 
ever they  are,  are  still  sacraments,'"^  (quse  ubicumque 
sunt  ipsa  sunt.)  From  this,  then,  it  is  plain  that  the  sa- 
craments of  such  Churches  as  have  forfeited  somev/hatof 
the  doctrine,  but  retained  the  discipline  of  Christ,  have  the 
integrity  of  sacraments.  Their  Baptism  regenerates, 
and  yet  not  as  being  theirs,  but  as  the  Baptism  of  the 
Church,  which  they  still  retain;  and  yet  again,  though  it 
regenerate,  its  full  effect  and  use  is  some  way  suspended 
until  the  regenerate  man  be  reconciled  to  the  Unity  of  the 
Church.  But  here  we  may  take  up  and  apply  a  rule  we 
have  before  laid  down,  namely,  that  such  as  are  in  a 
state  of  which  they  are  neither  the  conscious  authors  nor 
pertinacious  maintainers,  in  which,  too,  they  are  either 
greatly  hindered  by  any  high  degree  of  adverse  moral 
circumstance,  or  absolutely  holden  in  invincible  igno- 
rance, who  also,  in  simplicity  of  intention  and  prepara- 
tion of  heart,  seek  both  to  know  and  to  do  the  will  of 
Christ,  that  all  such  surely  belong  to  the  soul  of  the  One 
Church,  and  have  unconscious  communion  with  his  mys- 
tical body,  and  direct  spiritual  fellowship  with  Himself. 
What  is  here  said  of  Baptism  wnll  apply  also  to  all  other 
sacraments  and  sacramental  rites.     To  such  as  are  thus 


1)  De  Bapt.  cont.  Don.  lib.  i.  c.  10. 

2)  Contra  Ep.  Parmen.  lib.  ii.  13.     For  the  judgment  of  the  Councils  of 
Aries  and  Nice,  see  Waterland'd  Works,  vol.  x.  p.  128. 


266         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

morally  disposed,  we  may  hopefully  believe  that,  though 
uncanonical,  they  are  both  valid  and  efficacious. 

It  must  be  further  observed  that  whether  vahd  or  not 
in  its  mystical  nature,  the  discipline  of  the  Church  re- 
mains among  ihem  as  a  moral  institution  bearing  upon 
the  formation  of  the  individual  character.  The  pastoral 
jurisdiction  is  still  a  repression  of  indocility ;  and  the 
Eucharistical  action  the  test  of  peace  and  brotherhood. 
The  ascetic  and  penitential  rules  are  still  moral  powers 
for  the  purification  of  man's  nature.  If  we  should  be- 
iTeve  such  Churches  reduced  to  the  level  of  ethical  gym- 
nasia, it  is  evident  that  there  is  a  high  moral  benefit  still 
undoubtedly  inherited.  And  this  is  a  disposing  cause, 
and  ancillary  to  the  divine  life  of  faith.  li'  it  be  not  the 
pledge,  it  is  the  handmaid  of  higher  realities.  And  if 
these  bodies  be  darkened  by  the  clouding  over  of  truth, 
yet  we  may  not  err  in  hoping  that  to  their  pastors  also, 
who,  as  it  were,  keep  their  flocks  by  night,  there  may 
come  glad  tidings  and  brighter  lights  by  the  secret  min- 
istries of  mercy.  The  dogma,  therefore,  that  in  the  One 
Church  alone  there  is  salvation,  in  no  way  hinders  our 
hopefully  believing  that  many  belong  to  the  soul  of  the 
One  Church  who,  by  forfeiting  a  portion  of  their  trust, 
have  fallen  from  the  one  visible  body ;  nor  is  the  object-  ■ 
ive  exactness  of  this  dogma  as  a  revealed  verity  infringed 
by  such  a  hope. 

We  now  come  to  another  and  more  difficult  form  of 
the  same  question,  namely,  the  state  of  those  who  have 
made  forfeit  of  the  disciphne,  but  retained  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church. 

I  am  well  aware  how  startling  at  first  sight  must  be 
such  a  contrast.  Men  are  so  thoroughly  and  inveterately 
used  to  speak  of  doctrine  as  the  one  thing  needful,  and  of 
discipline  as  a  thing  unnecessary,  that  the  very  propound- 


THE    UNITY    OP    THE    CHURCH.  267 

ing  of  the  subject  may  almost  seem  like  announcing  a 
prejudged  conclusion. 

I  must,  therefore,  once  more  fall  back  upon  a  position 
taken  up  in  the  first  part  of  this  work.  In  entering  upon 
the  subject,  I  adopted  the  familiar  distinction  of  the  great 
mystery  of  Christ  into  doctrine  and  discipline,  under  an 
express  protest.  I  stated  that,  although  sufficiently  clear 
to  work  with,  it  was  a  distinction  essentially  unexact. 
The  use  of  it  has  hitherto  admitted  no  fallacious  ambi- 
guity, because  the  whole  current  of  our  reasoning  has 
been  directed  against  the  popular  errors  which  lurk  un- 
der its  shelter.  It  is  a  common  axiom  that  discipline 
may  be  changed,  but  doctrine  never ;  and  this  is  true, 
so  long  as  by  discipline  is  understood  only  the  detailed 
orders  and  rules  of  administration  which  the  apostolical 
authority  may  develop  out  of  itself,  such  as  the  penitential 
code,  and  the  like.  But  when  taken  to  include  what  are 
commonly,  but  most  unmeaningly,  called  forms  of  Church 
government,  it  is  absolutely  untrue.  Throughout  this 
work  I  have  endeavoured  to  prove  that  the  organic  pol- 
ity of  the  Church  is  a  divine  institution,  positive,  indeed, 
in  its  nature,  but  moral  in  its  design  ;  that  it  is  not  sub- 
ject to  man.  but  man  to  it ;  that  he  may  not  re-cast  it, 
forasmuch  as  it  is  ordained  to  re-mould  his  very  being; 
that  it  is,  therefore  absolutely  and  universally  binding, 
and  immutable.  There  is  no  reason  which  will  clear  a 
man  for  rejecting  the  apostolical  succession,  which  will 
not  also  acquit  him  for  rejecting  baptism ;  there  is  no 
reason  to  establish  the  right  of  men,  without  succession 
from  the  Apostles,  to  administer  the  Holy  Eucharist, 
which  will  not  justify  the  taking  away  of  the  cup.  The 
positive  institutions  of  Christ,  being  moral  as  a  continu- 
ous probation,  and  mystical  in  their  complex  effect,  are 
binding  in  all  their  parts.  To  touch  them  in  one  point  is  to 
mutilate  them  in  all.    It  is  a  usurpation  of  the  will  of  man 


268         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

upon  the  will  of  Christ,  and  a  subjecting  of  the  mould  to 
the  nature  which  it  is  ordained  to  shape.  So  much  as  to 
the  positive  and  moral  nature  of  discipline. 

But  we  must  look  also  to  its  mystical  design.  Once 
more  it  must  be  asked,  Are  the  Sacraments  of  Christ  to 
be  called  doctrine,  or  discipline  ?  If  doctrine,  why  shall 
we  not  call  Confirmation  and  the  Apostolical  Succession 
also  doctrine  ?  Why  shall  we  not  call  the  Church  itself 
doctrine  ?  Did  Christ  institute  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  ?  Did  He  not  also  institute  the  Church  ?  Who 
was  it  that  said,  "  As  my  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so 
send  I  you  ?"  What  is  the  doctrine  of  Christ  but  the 
relation  of  what  He  did  and  suffered  for  us,  presented  to 
our  understanding  ?  Now,  I  ask,  did  He,  or  did  He  not, 
ordain  a  means  of  applying  to  mankind,  and  to  each  man 
severally,  the  benefit  of  His  blood-shedding  ?  If  He  did 
so,  what  is  that  means  1  There  is  no  alternative  but  to 
assert  either  that  He  did,  or  that  He  did  not,  ordain  such 
a  means  ;  and  that  the  means  ordained  is  either  by  pre- 
senting truth  to  the  human  understanding  only,  or  by 
some  further  mode  of  making  man  a  partaker  in  what  he 
so  understands.  Is  the  mere  process  of  understanding 
alone  a  sufficient  application  of  the  blood  of  Christ  to  the 
soul  of  man  ?  Or  does  each  man,  by  an  act  of  his  own 
will,  apply  it  to  himself?  Is  it  man's  work  or  God's 
work?  Now  these  questions  must  be  answered  by  those 
that  would  retain  the  popular  theory  of  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline as  things  separate  and  heterogeneous.  They  that 
believe  that  it  is  God  who  applies  the  benefits  of  His  Son's 
death  to  the  souls  of  men,  (and  I  know  not  how  any 
Christian  can  dispute  it,)  believe  also  that  He  has  ordain- 
ed a  certain  and  definite  means  for  applying  it.  They 
believe  also  that  the  means  of  applying  it  is  as  absolutely 
necessary,  though  in  another  category,  as  the  thing  ap- 
plied ;   and  they  believe  the  discipline  of  the  Church, 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  269 

which  iackides  the  Holy  Sacraments  and  the  Divine  au- 
thority to  apply  them,  to  be  that  means.  They  cannot, 
therefore,  separate  doctrine  from  discipline  any  more 
than  truth  and  grace  from  the  means  through  which  this 
twofold  blessing  is  declared  and  delivered  to  them.  They 
are  as  the  structure  of  the  eye  to  the  light  of  heaven, 
diverse  in  nature,  but  absolutely  conjoined  by  a  Divine 
order  as  the  condition  of  sight;  or,  once  more,  the  whole 
Church,  including  doctrine  and  discipline,  is  to  them  the 
manifold  means  through  which  the  presence  of  Christ 
impresses  itself  upon  the  whole  nature  of  man.  It  is  so 
commingled  as  to  reach  his  understanding,  will,  affec- 
tions, imagination,  sight,  and  sense.  The  whole  man  is 
a  partaker  of  the  Church  as  also  of  the  redemption  which 
by  the  Church  is  applied  to  him.  It  is  the  more  reverent 
way  thus  to  look  upon  the  institutions  of  Christ ;  to  be- 
lieve that  they  are  the  garments  of  His  own  unseen  pres- 
ence ;  that  they  are  one  sacred  indivisible  whole,  to  be 
reverently  approached  with  feet  unshod  as  upon  holy 
ground  ;  to  be  gazed  on  with  penetrating  contemplation ; 
to  be  handled  even  as  when  Thomas,  with  a  better  in- 
structed faith,  drew  near  to  behold  his  Lord.  They  that 
so  boldly  divide  these  things  may  be  indefinitely  near 
the  temper  of  those  of  whom  it  is  written,  "  They  parted 
my  garments  among  them,  and  upon  my  vesture  did  they 
cast  lots." 

We  may  now  return  to  the  question  before  us,  i.  e.,  the 
case  of  those  who  have  forfeited  the  discipline,  retaining 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church. 

The  instances  are  such  communities  of  Christians  as, 
from  various  causes  becoming  separated  from  the  local 
jurisdiction  of  the  Church,  estabhshed  Presbyterian,  or 
other  still  more  imperfect  forms  of  Church  government. 
They  may  be  described  generally  under  the  head  of  Lu- 
therans, Zuinglians,  and  Calvinists ;  in  which  designa- 


270         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

tions  may  be  included  the  bodies  which  separated  them- 
selves from  the  obedience  of  the  British  Cliurches. 

I  will  not  at  present  raise  the  question  whether  or  no 
these  bodies  have  indeed  retained  the  integrity  of  doc- 
trine. We  will  assume  it,  and  deal  with  the  case  as  if 
it  were  proved. 

It  is  not  my  intention  to  enter  at  large  into  the  causes 
or  the  mode  of  the  original  separation.  The  question 
before  us  is  far  more  extensive,  and  might  be  treated  as 
a  mere  hypothesis.  Still  I  am  bound  to  say  that,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  just  causes  of  complaint,  which  made 
Luther  first  address  the  bishops  of  Brandenburg  and 
Mersberg,  and  his  steady  appeals  through  every  grada- 
tion of  ecclesiastical  order  to  the  award  of  a  general 
council ;  and  on  the  other,  the  violent  and  corrupt  admin- 
istration of  Leo  X.,  ending  in  an  excommunication 
against  a  man  whose  cause  was  still  unheard,  seem 
effectually  to  clear  both  him  and  those  who  for  his  sake 
were  driven  from  the  unity  of  the  Church  from  the  guilt 
of  schism.  Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  it  is  not  to  be 
denied  that  the  Protestant  bodies,  partly  through  the  sus- 
tained hostility  of  their  adversaries,  and  partly  through 
their  own  fault,  soon  began  to  justify  as  true  and  right  a 
condition  which  they  ought  to  have  lamented  as  the  press- 
ure of  a  hard  necessity.  They  formed,  and  pleaded  for, 
and  perpetuated  their  imperfect  system,  as  if  of  Divine 
authority  ;  and  by  these  after-acts  cancelled  not  a  little  of 
the  early  justness  of  their  cause.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  many  who  were  involved  in  the  effects  of  the  excom- 
munication, though  violently  driven  from  the  unity  of  the 
visible  Church,  were  not  cut  off  from  the  unity  of  Christ's 
mystical  body.  It  is  an  undeniable  rule  that  an  excom- 
munication, clave  errante^  though  effectual  as  to  its  visi- 
ble results,  is  as  to  all  invisible  effects  absolutely  null. 
This  was  doubtless  true  of  many  in  the  beginning  of  the 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  271 

separation  ;  but  at  the  same  time  the  Protestant  bodies 
did  not.  like  the  Nestorian  Churches,  fall  off  as  integral 
members  of  the  Church  universal,  but  were  formed  by 
the  personal  separation  of  individual  men.  It  can  hardly 
be  thought  that  so  large  a  proportion  were  unconsciously 
involved.  Their  societies  were  compacted  together  by 
the  conscious  self-addiction  of  responsible  persons.  And 
yet  it  may  be  pleaded  in  mitigation  that  their  cause  was 
just  and  righteous,  and  the  behaviour  of  their  adversaries 
was  harsh  and  prejudiced.  With  this  we  may  leave  the 
subject  of  their  first  separation. 

It  does  not  yet  appear  how  it  can  be  proved  that  these 
communities  have  retained  the  succession  derived  from 
the  Apostles,  and,  with  this,  the  authority  of  Christ  to 
minister  sacraments  in  His  name.  They  constituted  a 
ministry  of  their  own,  and  continued  the  use  of  Baptism 
and  the  Supper  of  the  Lord.  What  are  we  to  judge  of 
sacraments  as  used  among  them?  It  will  be  remembered 
that  the  reasoning  under  the  last  section,  relating  to  the 
validity  of  baptism  administered  by  heretics  and  schis- 
matics, in  all  cases  applied  only  to  the  baptisms  of  ordain- 
ed men.  Nothing  hitherto  said  expressly  relates  to  the 
baptism  of  unordained  hands.  The  principles  on  which 
St.  Augustin  argued  for  the  validity  of  such  sacraments 
are  these:  first,  that  they  were  administered  by  men  pos- 
sessing holy  orders ;  and,  secondly,  that,  when  adminis- 
tered, both  baptism  and  orders  impress  an  indelible  char- 
acter. But  there  is  yet  another  question  to  be  consid- 
ered, namely,  whether  or  no  the  Church  acknowledged 
the  baptisms  of  those  who  had  never  received  the  '■'■jiLS 
dajidi,''^  or  authority  to  administer  the  sacrament.  The 
principle  of  the  Church  was  as  follows:  The  authority  to 
baptize  was  given  to  the  Apostles,  to  be  conveyed  to 
those  whom  they  should  see  fit  to  invest  with  it.  They 
invested  the  bishops  of  the  Church  with  the  same  power 


272  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

of  administering  and  of  transmitting  the  power.  The 
bishops  of  the  Church  at  first  so  far  restrained  it  to  them- 
selves as  to  suffer  no  presbyter  to  baptize  without  their 
consent.  When  the  baptism  of  presbyters  had  become 
common,  still  it  was  withheld  from  deacons:  to  them, 
however,  in  the  absence  of  the  bishop  and  priest,  or  in 
cases  of  necessity,  the  privilege  was  conceded.  In  cases 
of  necessity,  and  in  the  absence  of  bishop,  priest,  and 
deacon,  a  Catholic  layman,  authorized  by  the  bishop, 
might  give  baptism.  So  far,  and  no  farther,  the  privi- 
lege of  baptizing  was  extended  within  the  Unity  of  the 
Church.  The  baptisms  of  a  deacon  without  license  was 
uncanonical;  of  a  layman  without  license  was  a  usurpa- 
tion likened  to  the  sin  of  Uzziah :  yet  the  baptism,  being 
given,  was  not  iterated,  because  of  its  indelible  character. 
We  must  now  go  on  to  the  cases  of  baptism  given  out  of 
the  unity  of  the  Church,  and  without  authority.  They 
are  of  two  kinds:  first,  baptism  administered  by  ordained 
men  in  heresy  or  schism ;  next,  baptisms  given  by  men 
unordained,  unhcensed,  and  without  the  Church.  This 
is  the  only  form  of  the  case  with  which  we  are  now  con- 
cerned. We  shall,  however,  better  understand  the  mind 
of  the  Church  upon  the  point,  if  we  take  up  the  subject 
where  we  left  it  in  the  last  section,  and  carry  it  on  until 
we  come  to  the  question  before  us. 

We  have  already  seen  that,  in  virtue  of  the  indelible 
character  of  orders,  the  validity  of  baptism  was  allowed 
in  the  case  of  heretical  and  schisraatical  clergy.  We 
will  now  consider  how  far  the  Church  has  permitted  the 
intervention  of  laymen. 

In  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  which  may  be  taken 
to  represent  the  sense  of  the  Church  in  the  first  ages, 
laymen  are  expressly  forbidden  to  baptize.'  By  Tertul- 
lian  it  is  said  that  laymen  have  an  inherent  right  to  bap- 

1)   Const.  Apost.  lib.  iii,  c.  10. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        273 

tize  in  virtue  of  their  own  baptism,  but  a  suspended  right 
in  virtue  of  the  institution  of  the  priesthood  :^  which  ar- 
gument while  it  contends  for  the  abstract  vahdity  of  the 
act,  denies  the  ordinary  lawfulness.  The  Council  of 
Eliberis  gave  permission  to  laymen,  having  their  own 
baptism  perfect,  (which  may  mean  either  being  in  full 
communion  with  the  Church,  or  in  opposition  to  clinic 
baptism,)  and  not  being  bigamists,  (being  thereby  also 
susceptible  of  holy  orders,)  to  administer  baptism  in  for- 
eign travel,  or  when  no  Church  is  near,  to  a  catechumen 
in  necessity  of  sickness ;  and  yet  so  that,  in  the  case  of 
life  being  prolonged,  they  should  bring  the  baptized  per- 
son to  the  bishop  for  imposition  of  hands.^  In  this  per- 
missive canon  there  are  no  less  than  seven  distinct  limita- 
tions ;  two  in  point  of  place,  two  in  the  administration, 
two  in  the  subject,  and  one  in  case  of  survival.  No  bet- 
ter proof  can  be  given  of  the  sense  of  the  Spanish  Church, 
at  least.  In  a  passage  ascribed  to  St.  Augustin,  the 
same  doctrine  is  held,  namely,  that  by  delegation  through 
the  bishop  a  layman  may  baptize.  He  gives  also  an  in- 
stance, such  as  the  Council  had  in  view,  namely,  of  bap- 
tism administered  by  a  layman  on  board  a  ship  in  a 
etorm  ;  and  concludes  that  it  maybe  done  in  extreme  ne- 
cessity.^ In  like  manner  he  says,  arguing  for  the  validity 
of  schismatical  baptisms,  "Although  even  a  layman, 
compelled  by  necessity,  should  give  to  a  dying  man  that 
which,  when  he  himself  received  it,  he  learned  how  it  is 
to  be  given,  I  know  not  how  any  one  will  piously  say  it 

1)  "  Dandi  quidem  habet  jus  summus  sacerdos  qui  est  episcopus  :  dehinc 
Presbyteri  etDiaconi ;  non  tamen  sine  Episcopi  auctoritate,  propter  Ecclesiae 
honorem,  quo  salvo,  salva  pax  est.  Alioquin  etiam  laicis  jus  est."  De 
Baptismo,  xvii. 

2)  Albaspin  de  Veter.  Eccles.  Ritibus.  Not.  in  Can.  38.  Concil.  Elib., 
p.  318. 

3)  Ap.  Gratian  de  consecrat.  Diet.  4,  36,  quoted  by  Bingham,  Scholasti- 
eal  Hist.  c.  i.  13. 

13 


274         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

should  be  repeated.  If  it  be  done,  indeed,  with  no  com- 
pelling necessity,  it  is  an  usurpation  of  another's  office ; 
but  if  necessity  compel,  it  is  either  no  fault,  or  a  venial 
one."'  St.  Jerome  also,  speaking  of  the  necessity  of  the 
sacerdotal  order  as  a  means  of  unity,  adds,  "  Hence  it 
came  that,  wiihout  the  chrism  and  order  of  the  bishop, 
neither  presbyter  nor  deacon  have  a  right  to  baptize; 
which  often,  if  necessity  compel,  we  know  to  be  permit- 
ted to  laymen.'"^  It  is  plain  that  both  St.  Augusiin  and 
St.  Jerome  speak  of  Catholic  laymen;  and  the  latter  of  a 
permitted  license,  otherwise  deeming  it  a  usurpation.  A 
parallel  expression  may  be  found  in  the  Epistle  of  Gela- 
sius.  Indeed,  without  more  reference,  it  may  be  stated 
that  it  was  a  prevalent  rule  to  acknowledge  baptisms  ad- 
ministered by  laymen,  with  license,  in  cases  of  necessity, 
and  in  the  unity  of  the  Church.  There  is  one  more  step 
to  be  considered,  namely,  how  the  Church  was  wont  to 
regard  the  baptism  of  a  layman  given  without  license  or 
necessity.  St.  Augustin  puts  this  case  as  an  hypothesis, 
and  says,  "  What  has  been  given  cannot  be  said  to  have 
been  not  given ;"  and,  on  the  principle  of  the  indelible 
character  of  baptism,  adds  that  it  is  not  to  be  iterated : 
but  he  declares  it  to  be  usurped,  unlawful,  and,  unless  re- 
pented of,  pernicious  to  the  giver  and  receiver."^  He 
then  goes  on  to  say,  that  there  is  another  question  con- 
cerning baptism  administered  by  men  who  are  not  them- 
selves Christians,  of  which,  without  the  authority  of  a 
council,  he  says  he  will  not  venture  an  assertion  ;  and 
then  adds :  "  But  concerning  those  that  are  separated 
from  the  unity  of  the  Church,  there  is  now  no  question 
but  that  they  both  have  and  may  give  baptism,  and  that 
they  have  and  give  it  to  their  own  destruction,  out  of  the 

1)  Contra  Ep.  Parmcn.  lib.  ii.  13. 

2)  Adv.  Lucifcrianos,  torn.  iv.  295,  ed.  Ben. 

3)  Contra  Ep.  Farmen.  lib.  ii.  13. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  275 

bond  of  peace.  For  this  has  been  already  discussed, 
considered,  defined,  and  confirmed,  in  the  unity  of  the 
whole  world." ^  This  mention  of  an  oecumenical  synod 
must  refer  to  the  Council  either  of  Aries  or  of  Nice ;  and 
by  this  we  may  fix  the  line  and  the  hmits  of  St.  Augus- 
tin's  argument:  for  both  judged  by  the  same  rule.  By 
the  Council  of  Nice  it  is  ordered  that  the  Novatian  clergy 
should  be  received  in  their  orders,  and  therefore,  of  course, 
with  their  baptisms.  And  this  was  all  St.  Augustin  was 
labouring  to  establish  against  the  Donatists.  His  hy- 
pothesis of  usurped  lay  baptism,  given  out  of  the  Church, 
was  confirmed  by  no  council,  but  only  the  schismatical 
baptisms  of  men  having  valid  orders  ;  and  the  argument 
was  as  follows: — [[  we  acknowledge  among  ourselves 
the  usurped  baptisms  of  laymen,  how  much  more  the  un- 
lawful baptisms  of  ordained  men  among  you.  Thus  far, 
from  antiquity,  there  is  no  warrant  to  believe  that  usurped 
baptism  by  unordained  men  in  schisms  was  acknowledged 
to  be  valid.  I  say  as  yet,  because  we  will  next  consider 
an  hypothetical  case  put  by  St.  Augustin,  and  his  own 
resolution  of  it.  He  proposes  the  following  series  of  ques- 
tions : — Ought  the  baptism  of  a  man  not  himself  baptized 
to  be  acknowledged  ?  Does  the  state  of  mind  in  the  re- 
ceiver affect  the  integrity  of  the  sacrament ;  as,  for  in- 
stance, when  it  is  received  in  simulation,  or  without  simu- 
lation ?  If  in  simulation,  whether  deceitfully,  as  in  the 
Church,  or  in  that  which  is  thought  to  be  the  Church ; 
or  in  sport,  as  in  a  theatre?  And  which  is  the  more  sin- 
ful, to  receive  baptism  deceitfully  in  the  Church,  or  with- 
out deceit  in  heresy  or  schism  ;  that  is,  without  simula- 
tion of  mind  ?  or  again,  in  heresy  with  deceit  or  in  a  the- 
atre with  faith,  if  so  be  any  one  in  the  act  should  be  moved 
with  sudden  piety?  After  many  hypothetical  compari- 
sons or  contrasts  of  this  sort,  he  goes  on  to  say :  "But  it 

1)  Contra  Ep.  Parmen.  lib.  ii.  13.  ^ 


276         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

is  safe  for  us  not  to  venture  forward  with  rashness  of 
judgment  into  those  things  which  have  neither  been  be- 
gun in  any  CathoUc  provincial  council,  nor  determined  in 
any  plenary  council ;  but  to  assert  that  only  with  confi- 
dence which,  under  the  government  of  our  Lord  God 
and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  has  been  confirmed  by  the  con- 
sent of  the  Universal  Church.  However,  if  any  one 
should  urge  me  to  say  what  I  should  judge  if  I  were  pre- 
sent at  any  council  in  which  a  question  on  these  points 
should  be  raised,  and  none  had  spoken  before  me  whose 
opinions  I  should  rather  follow — if  I  were  then  so  affected 
as  I  was  when  I  spoke  as  I  have  done,  I  should  by  no 
means  doubt  that  they  had  received  baptism  who,  where- 
soever, and  by  whomsoever,  had  received  that  rite  con- 
secrated by  the  evangelical  word,  without  simulation  on 
their  own  part,  and  with  a  certain  faith:  although  it 
would  not  avail  for  their  spiritual  salvation,  if  they  lacked 
charity  by  which  they  should  be  engrafted  into  the  Cath- 
olic Church.  For  '  though  I  have  faith  to  move  moun- 
tains, and  have  not  charity,  I  am  nothing.'  As  also 
passing  by  the  determinations  of  our  forefathers,  (the 
Council  of  Carthage,)  I  doubt  not  that  they  have  baptism 
who,  though  they  receive  it  deceitfully,  yet  receive  it  in 
the  Church,  or  wheresoever  the  Church  is  thought  to  be 
by  those  in  whose  society  it  is  received,  concerning  whom 
it  is  said,  '  They  went  out  from  us.'  "*  He  then  adds, 
that  the  other  questions  concerning  simulation  and  mock- 
ery God  only  can  determine.  I  think  it  may  be  said 
that  we  have  now  the  full  evidence  which  maybe  drawn 
from  the  first  four  centuries  in  favour  of  the  validity  of 
baptisms  administered  uncanonically,  and  in  usurpation 
of  office.     It  amounts  to  this  : — 

1.  That  lay  baptisms  by  license,  and  in  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  are  to  be  recognized. 

1)  De  Bapt.  cont.  Don.  lib.  vii.  53. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  277 

2.  That  lay  baptisms  without  Hcense  or  necessity,  but 
in  the  unity  of  the  Church,  are  censured,  but  admitted. 

3.  That  baptisms  by  ordained  men  in  heresy  or  schism 
are  valid,  but  unlawful. 

4.  That  baptisms  by  unordained  men  out  of  the  unit}'- 
of  the  Church  are  usurpations,  and  yet  not  to  be  iterated, 
for  this  reason,  that  the  Sacrament  has  still  an  integrity 
in  itself. 

But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  this  last  conclusion  is  no 
determination  of  the  Church,  but  only  an  opinion  given 
by  St.  Augustin  under  protest  and  with  submission.  It 
was,  therefore,  a  point  undefined. 

We  may  now  adduce  ihe  counter-evidence  : — 

1.  Every  Christian  writer  for  three  hundred  years,  with 
the  only  exception  of  Tertullian,  and  that  in  one  passage 
alone,  asserts  the  absolute  unlawfulness  of  a  layman's  as- 
suming any  sacerdotal  office,  which  the  Apostolical  Con- 
stitutions, the  entire  testimony  of  St.  Cyprian,  the  argu- 
ments of  St.  Basil,  and  Pacian  and  others  plainly  show. 

2.  The  whole  scheme  of  first  principles  on  which  the 
Church  was  founded  confirms  the  same  rule ;  as  for  in- 
stance, the  divine  and  proper  nature  of  the  priesthood  as 
distinguished  from  the  spiritual  and  virtual  priesthood  of 
all  Christians.  Writers  but  slightly  acquainted  with  the 
testimonies  of  antiquity  have  almost  always  fallen  into  a 
confusion  on  this  point.  They  have  taken  up  the  one  pass- 
age in  Tertullian,  and  the  other  in  St.  Jerome,  in  which  they 
both  quote  the  words  of  the  Apocalypse,  "  who  hath  made 
us  kings  and  priests  unto  God,"  as  showing  that  all 
Christians  are  priests.  But  the  passage  would  prove 
equally  well  that  all  Christians  are  kings;  and  so  it  does, 
but  not  in  the  sense  required  by  the  parties  adducing  it. 
Granted  that  all  Christians,  spiritually  and  virtually,  are 
kings  and  priests.  In  that,  then,  the  clergy  and  laity  are 
equal.     A  bishop,  or  a  priest,  or  a  deacon,  is  a  king  and 


278        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

a  priest  by  inherent  right  as  much  as  a  layman ;  but  they 
have  something  further  which  that  layman  never  had, 
and  never  can  have,  except  as  they  themselves  received 
it;  and  that  is,  a  divine  commission  and  authority  to 
stand  in  Christ's  stead  between  God  and  man.  This  no 
man  has,  nor  can  have,  by  baptism  alone;  and  no  man, 
how  hardily  soever  he  may  have  asserted  it,  has  ever 
ventured  the  attempt  to  prove  it  by  evidence  from  Chris- 
tian records,  or  even  to  meet  the  refutative  evidence  by 
which  the  error  is  overthrown.  It  were  as  good,  because 
God  called  the  people  of  Israel  "a  kingdom  of  priests,"* 
to  deny  the  divine  appointment  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood. 
A  further  and  a  final  proof  of  this  may  be  found  in  the 
fact  that,  throughout  the  whole  mass  of  all  that  constitutes 
the  history,  records,  laws,  documents,  of  Christianity, 
there  is  not  one  that  does  not  declare  ordination  and  the 
consecration  of  the  Eucharist  by  a  layman  to  be  abso- 
lutely null.  By  the  same  rule  all  sacerdotal  functions 
were  alike  vested  in  the  priesthood  alone. 

Upon  all  these  grounds,  therefore,  upon  the  Divine  com- 
mission restricting  sacerdotal  functions  to  the  priesthood 
of  Christ,  upon  the  limitations  imposed  even  on  priests 
and  deacons  in  the  ministering  of  Baptism,  upon  the  com- 
plex and  manifold  limitations  under  which,  in  extreme  ne- 
cessity alone,  a  lay  hand  was  licensed  to  baptize;  upon  the 
stronor  determination  of  the  African  and  Eastern  churches 
annulling  all  baptisms  even  of  ordained  men  out  of  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  which  determinations,  though  re- 
versed, show  plainly  enough  the  current  of  belief;  upon 
the  bare  and  hypothetical  reasoning  by  which  St.  Augus- 
tin  ultimately  decides  that  no  baptism  administered  with 
all  things  necessary  to  its  integral  perfection  should  be 
iterated ;  upon  the  fact  that  the  early  Church  made  no 
determination  on  the  validity  of  baptism  by  laymen  in  a 

1)   Exodus  xix.  6. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  279 

state  of  schism,  because  no  such  case  was  ever  propound- 
ed for  decision :  upon  all  these  grounds  we  may  safely 
conclude  that  such  baptisms  are  thus  far  doubtful. 

As  a  contrary  determination  has  for  some  centuries 
prevailed  in  the  Roman  Church,  it  may  be  right  to  notice 
it  in  this  place.  By  Pope  Nicholas  it  was  determined, 
and  afterwards  declared  by  the  Council  of  Florence,  that 
in  case  of  necessity  it  is  lawful  for  any  man  or  woman, 
whether  Christian  or  Pagan,  to  baptize,  if  only  there  be 
present  the  right  form,  matter,  and  intention.^  The 
reason  assigned  by  Bellarmine  is  this :  "  Since  there  is 
not  required,  in  the  minister  of  baptism,  faith,  probity,  or 
orders,  there  is  no  reason  why  the  baptism  which  is  minis- 
tered by  a  Pagan  or  a  Jew  should  not  be  true  baptism,  if 
those  things  be  present  which  are  necessary  to  the  essence 
of  baptism."^  He  afterwards  observes,  that  the  rule  giv- 
en by  Tertullian  and  Jerome,  that  a  man  may  give  what 
he  has  received,  is  untrue,  for  so  a  Presbyter  might  ordain 
a  Presbyter,  and  a  deacon  a  deacon.  He  then  adds,  that 
it  is  not  a  good  argument  to  say  that  a  man  cannot  give 
what  he  has  not  himself  received ;  for  so,  imworthy  minis- 
ters could  not  convey  justification  to  others :  and  he  sums 
up  as  follows : — "  Therefore  it  is  not  required  that  he  who 
is  to  minister  baptism  should  have  baptism  formally  in 
himself;  but  it  is  enough  if  he  have  it  virtually  and 
ministerially,  as  all  have  who  have  the  use  of  reason, 
speech,  and  hands,  so  as  to  speak  by  design,  and  sprinkle 
water."^ 

Now  upon  this  determination  there  are  many  things 
to  be  observed :  as,  first,  that  the  primitive  Church  did 
for  ages  most  strictly  inhibit  baptism  to  all  women  ;*  that 
there  is  no  evidence  that  the  baptism  of  women  was  re- 
ceived when  usurped  f  that  the  practice  of  indiscriminate 

1)  Bellarm,  de  Sacr.  Bapt.  c.  vii.  7.  2)  lb.  3)  lb.  s.  8. 

4)  Bingham's  Scholastical  History  of  Lay  Baptism,  ch.  i.  s.  17. 
5;  lb  s.  18. 


280         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

baptism  crept  in  through  a  misapplication  of  one  text  of 
St.  John/  as  the  practice  of  infant  communion  was  de- 
clared necessary  to  salvation  from  the  seventh  century 
onward  through  a  misapplication  of  another  -^  that  it  is 
abhorrent  from  the  instincts  of  Christianity  to  conceive 
that  a  Pagan  may,  uncalled  and  unconverted,  minister 
a  Sacrament  of  Christ. 

It  is  to  be  further  observed  that  Bellarmine  speaks  too 
freely  when  he  says  that  a  General  Council,  as  St.  Au- 
gustin  desired,  has  determined  the  doubt  which  he  did 
not  venture  to  resolve:  for  it  is  well  known  that  the 
Council  of  Florence  was  not  general  either  by  repre- 
eentation  or  reception ;  that  it  was  a  synod  got  up  against 
the  Council  of  Basle  ;  that  it  was  attended  by  only  a  few 
bishops,  who  left  the  Council  of  Basle,  and  by  the  Pope's 
court  and  followers  ;  that  the  French  Church  and  king- 
dom did  not  then  acknowledge  it,  nor  do  the  Galilean^ 
or  Eastern  Churches  acknowledge  it  now. 

Neither  was  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  which  this  de- 
cision is  virtually  renewed,  a  General  Council. 

Therefore  the  question  is  as  open  now  as  in  St.  Au- 
gustin's  day.  It  seems  evident,  then,  that  if  the  baptism.s 
of  unordained  men  out  of  the  unity  of  the  Church  cannot 
be  shown  to  be  invalid,  neither  can  they  be  shown  with 
certain  reason  to  be  valid ;  and,  therefore,  although  the 
Sacrament  may  not  be  iterated,  it  may,  as  in  a  case  of 
doubt,  be  conditionally  given  to  such  as  are  reconciled  to 
the  unity  of  the  Church. 

But  it  must  be  further  observed,  that  in  the  texture 
of  the  evidence,  which  seems  to  favour  the  validity  or 
actuality,  if  I  may  so  speak,  of  all  baptisms  administered 
with  the  right  form,  matter,  and  intention,  are  interwoven 
also  frequent  assertions  of  the  suspended  efficacy,  or  even 
of  the  perilous  effect  of  baptisms  which  are  given,  re- 

1)   St.  John  iii,  5.        2)  lb.  vi.  53.        3)  Launoii  Epist.  lib.  viii.  c.  39. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        281 

ceived,  and  had  out  of  the  unity  of  the  Church.  Repent- 
ance and  reconciliation  are  declared  to  be  necessary  to 
give  to  such  baptisms  their  saving  power. ^ 

We  are  now  in  a  condition  to  go  on  with  the  inquiry 
as  to  tlie  rites  and  sacraments  of  the  communities  which 
have  forfeited  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 

It  seems  that  in  these  bodies  the  authority  trans- 
mitted by  succession  from  the  Apostles  is  lost,  and  with 
it  the  primary  idea  of  all  acts  done  by  commission  from 
Christ.  That  in  cases  of  absolute  necessity  a  community 
should  confine  ministerial  functions  to  one  or  more,  with- 
out pretending  to  invest  them  with  sacerdotal  powers 
which  it  does  not,  either  taken  severally  or  as  a  body, 
possess,  would  be,  I  conceive,  not  only  a  lawful  but  com- 
mendable act,  as  testifying  to  their  own  incompetence  to 
renew  what  Christ  alone  began,  their  desire  of  its  resto- 
ration, their  deliberate  endeavour  to  follow  the  Divine 
analogy,  and  to  come  as  near  as  possible  to  the  form  of 
the  Divine  institution.  We  may  readily  believe  that 
such  a  conduct  would  have  the  silent  power  of  a  com- 
mendatory prayer  interceding  with  God  for  deliverance 
from  their  straits,  and  a  restitution  of  His  own  gifts.  We 
need  hardly,  therefore,  enter  upon  a  formal  justification 
of  the  provisional  steps  taken  by  Luther  and  others  at 
the  beginning  of  their  great  movement.  If  they  had  seen 
no  way  of  regaining  the  shelter  of  the  Apostolical  Suc- 
cession, there  was  still  a  safe,  though  a  sad,  resource  for 
them.  They  might  have  well  commended  themselves  to 
God's  mercy,  as  those  w^ho  are  smitten  by  unjust  excom- 
munications. But,  in  fact,  their  ultimate  difficulties  were 
not  so  great  as  some  would  make  them  appear.  It  is 
easier  to  show  that  they  vvere  pressed  by  a  necessity  at 
the  outset  than  in  the  after-course  of  their  proceedings. 
It  cannot  be  doubted  that  they  might  have  obtained 

1)    S.  Aug.  ut  supra,  pp.  320,  321. 

13* 


282        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

valid  consecrations;^  but  they  deliberately  rejected  the 
apostolical  discipline,  and  constituted  a  new  ministry,  to 
which  it  appears  that  they  re-ordained  priests  and  even 
bishops  who  had  received  Catholic  ordination.  From 
this  point  in  their  course  they  must  find  their  own  de- 
fence. In  what  sense  they  possess  the  present  authority 
of  Christ  among  them,  by  what  commission  they  admin- 
ister bapiism,  confirmation,  absolution,  orders,  the  Holy 
Eucharist,  in  Christ's  stead  and  name,  we  know  not. 
What  decision  soever  we  may  make  in  favour  of  a  bap- 
tism so  received,  it  is  certain  that  the  Catholic  Church 
has  never  for  a  moment  admitted  the  validity  of  con- 
firmation, absolution,  orders,  or  the  Eucharist  by  the 
hands  of  unordained  men.  Granting  that  their  baptisms 
are  to  be  received,  what  shall  be  said  of  the  whole  line 
of  Christian  ordinances  by  which  the  path  of  redeemed 
man  is  marked  out  to  heaven,  and  the  generations  of  the 
Church  by  a  spiritual  lineage  perpetuated  and  bound  in 
one? 

And  this  case  becomes  the  stronger  when  we  turn 
our  thoughts  from  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinist  bodies 
abroad  to  schismatics  from  the  British  churches.  In  be- 
half of  the  foreign  communities  it  may  be  pleaded  that 
they  were  excluded  by  unjust  excommunications,  and 
that  their  exclusion  was  perpetuated  by  an  iron  necessity 
galling  their  conscience  to  the  very  quick.  Not  so  they 
that  separated  from  the  British  churches  :  they  were  not 
excommunicated,  but  self-severed  from  the  Catholic 
Church  :  they  did  not  withdraw  from  Churches  tainted 
with  Roman  errors,  but  from  bishops  witnessing  the  pure 
word  of  God:  they  had  neither  necessity  nor  justifying 
plea  for  their  separation.     It  was  a  deliberate  schism, 

1)  Jer.  Taylor,  Episcopacy  asserted,  p.  lOG :  and  Skinner's  Eccl.  Hist, 
of  Scotland,  vol.  ii.  pp.  129 — 137,  where  ten  Bishops  holding  the  reformed 
doctrines  are  named. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  283 

beginning  not  in  a  secession  which,  as  a  landslip,  carries 
with  it  involuntary  and  unconscious  sufferers,  but  in  a 
personal,  several,  conscious  choice  and  election.  The 
individual  will  was  energetically  active,  and  almost  every 
several  man  responsible  for  his  acts.  Now  of  such  self- 
aggregated  bodies  all  that  we  can  safely  assert  is,  that 
the  baptisms  they  administer  should  not  be  more  than 
conditionally  supplied.  For  so  long  as  they  persist  in 
schism  and  rivalry,  and  in  seeking  the  overthrow  of  the 
branches  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  Great  Britain,  they 
must  strip  themselves  of  every  plea  of  necessity  or  of 
ignorance.  Such  seems  to  be  the  conclusion  inevitable 
to  all  who  prefer  rather  to  be  guided  by  Catholic  rule 
than  by  the  wayward,  self-trusting  calculations  of  a  pri- 
vate spirit.  And  it  must  be  confessed  that  this  reduces 
the  mystical  character  of  the  Sacraments  and  other  rites 
used  by  these  communities  to  a  difficult  question,  of 
which  I  shall  attempt  no  decision. 

We  may  now  go  on  to  consider  the  moral  character 
and  effect  of  these  self-constituted  systems.  If  there  be 
any  truth  in  what  has  been  already  urged,  the  discipline 
of  the  Church  is  an  effectual  probation,  and  means  of 
moulding  the  character  of  men,  in  virtue  of  their  one 
chief  condition,  namely,  that  it  is  not  of  man  but  of  God. 
It  is  as  the  relations  of  fatherhood  and  brotherhood  which 
nature  ordains,  unchangeable  and  sacred,  compared  with 
voluntary  associations,  of  which  every  member  comes  in 
or  goes  out  as  likes  him  best.  In  the  former  there  is 
settled  authority,  and  binding  ligatures,  and  peremptory 
laws  of  obedience  and  forbearance.  In  the  latter  there 
is  no  authority  but  such  as  men  have  made  for  them- 
selves, no  brotherhood  but  such  as  they  have  chosen. 
So  soon  as  the  yoke  galls,  or  the  curb  checks,  the  indi- 
vidual will  withdraws  itself  It  escapes  from  the  proba- 
tion so  soon  as  the  discipline  makes  its  first  approaches 


284  THE    UNITY    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

felt.  It  is  obvious  that,  wheresoever  the  will  of  man  is 
free  to  withdraw  from  its  guide  and  ruler,  it  guides  and 
rules  itself.  In  those  communities,  therefore,  which  have 
made  forfeit  of  this  moral  government,  we  should  expect 
to  find  what  in  fact  we  do  see, — the  traditionary  types  of 
character  clouded  and  lowered ;  the  judgments  of  men 
moulding  and  debasing  the  revealed  rule ;  the  corrective 
powers  weakened  ;  the  individual  will  overgrown  to  a 
principle  of  moral  anarchy ;  the  intellect  excited  into  a 
craving  activity,  impatient  of  external  evidence,  veering 
and  changing  about  in  the  currents  of  individual  bias 
and  prejudice.  Perhaps  the  leading  phenomenon  of  such 
communities  will  be  found  to  be  the  overwrought  energy 
of  the  intellect,  laborious  in  destruction,  and  too  reslless 
ever  to  build  up  any  positive  truth.  The  very  nature  of 
man,  losing  its  unity  with  God  in  the  unity  of  His  Church, 
is  at  jar  and  bickering  with  itself;  and  its  direct  tendency 
is  to  baffle  its  own  powers,  and  to  reduce  itself  to 
nothing. 

And,  lastly,  we  may  take  up  what  was  before  only 
thrown  out  in  passing.  As  a  result  of  this  moral  decline, 
we  find  also  in  all  such  bodies  as  have  forfeited  the  disci- 
pline of  the  Church,  that  they  have  lost  also  even  that 
which  they  seemed  to  retain.  "  Whosoever  hath  not, 
from  him  shall  be  taken  away  even  that  he  hath."^  We 
find  in  every  case  that  they  have  forfeited,  more  or  less, 
the  doctrine  also.  It  is  not  to  be  thought  that  there  are 
nowhere  to  be  found  men  who  retain  the  doctrines  of 
Christian  redemption  ;  but  that,  as  a  whole,  the  bodies 
which  have  lost  the  discipline  of  Christ  have  sunk  into 
rationalism,  Socinianism,  and  infidelity.  It  would  be 
easy  to  specify  other  errors  destructive  of  sanctity,  but 
these  are  the  broader  and  more  theological  features  of 
their  declension,  and  to  them  I  would  confine  myself.     In 

1)   St.  Matthew  xiii,  19. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  285 

very  deed,  unity  is  the  sacrament  of  truth.  It  is  by 
unity  that  it  is  conserved  and  transmitted  ;  by  abruption 
and  isolation  that  it  is  exhausted  and  extinguished.  The 
state  of  doctrinal  teaching  in  these  bodies  in  Germany, 
Poland,  Switzerland,  many  parts  of  France,  Great  Britain, 
and  America,  will  show  that  the  unity  of  doctrine,  the  one 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  is  not  among  them. 
Many  of  them  have  ceased  to  witness  for  Christ's  God- 
head, manhood,  and  sacrifice ;  that  is,  for  the  faith  in 
which  '•  he  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved, 
but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 

Now  it  is  plain  that,  by  their  original  forfeiture  of  the 
one  discipline,  they  virtually  and  initially  forfeited  the 
whole  deposit  of  Christ.  The  first  loss  drew  all  others 
after  it.  Although  the  full  declension  was  not  seen  at 
once,  the  mystical,  moral,  and  doctrinal  systems  perished 
together.  They  lingered  on  as  bodies  of  which  the  or- 
ganic frame  is  maimed  ;  and  they  died  rather  by  a  natu- 
ral than  by  a  mysterious  law.  Even  after  their  virtual 
extinction  as  Christian  Churches,  there  was,  as  in  the 
corpse  of  the  dead,  a  lingering  warmth,  which  made  a 
mocking  promise  of  life  ;  till  that  too  fled,  and  they  were 
left  in  the  cold  torpor  of  heresy  or  unbelief 

What  may  be  the  change  in  the  condition  of  such 
bodies,  consequent  upon  the  breach  of  their  relation  of 
faith  with  God,  is  a  mystery  which  must  be  left  to  His 
inscrutable  mercy.  What  must  be  the  condition  of  all 
men  who  make  forfeit  of  the  moral  media,  so  to  speak,  of 
salvation,  it  is  easier  to  judge.  It  is  evident  that  the  loss 
of  truth  and  discipline  must  put  the  moral  nature  of  man 
at  a  disadvantage  indefinitely  great.  If  the  restoration  of 
the  right  knowledo-e  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ 
be  a  means  to  restore  the  Divine  image  to  the  soul  of 
man,  if  the  Church  be  so  formed  by  the  wisdom  of  God 
as  to  teach  and  to  train  the  moral  nature  of  man  into  His 


286        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

own  likeness,  it  is  evident  that  the  rejection  of  it  must  in- 
volve a  loss  by  natural  consequence,  so  far  as  those 
means  are  contemplated,  of  the  designed  results.  And 
if  it  be  also  a  probation  of  man's  faith,  then  failure  in  the 
trial  must  have  some  consequence  in  the  world  unseen. 

Nevertheless,  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  though 
often  cunningly  simulated  by  unsanctified  men,  have  a 
stamp  and  character  which  in  the  main  are  surely  to  be 
known;  so  that  God  maybe  seen  oftentimes  revealing 
His  merciful  purpose  in  the  manifest  righteousness  of 
men  whose  outward  lot  is  most  adverse  to  a  Christian's 
hope.  Wheresoever  these  are  seen,  they  are  to  be  ac- 
knowledged with  thankfulness.  Though  in  many  cir- 
cumstantial conditions  unlike  Cornelius,  yet  their  accept- 
ance may  be  assured  to  us  by  his.  The  analogy  of  God's 
revealed  design  in  the  Gospel  may  persuade  us  of  a 
truth,  which  the  actual  precedents  of  His  dispensations 
may  not  be  enough  to  prove,  namely,  that  as,  in  the  elder 
economy,  He  admitted  many  approximations  to  salvation 
in  those  who  were  not  true  partakers  of  its  visible  sacra- 
ments, so  now  among  all  mankind,  whether  in  nations 
never  as  yet  converted,  or  in  bodies  which  have  been 
disinherited  by  the  act  of  their  forefathers,  we  may  confi- 
dently trust  that  many  belong  to  the  soul  of  the  one  true 
Church  who  have  never  been  made  partakers  of  its  visi- 
ble body.  And  here  I  must  note,  once  for  all,  a  deep 
and  injurious  fallacy,  which  is  often  imposed  upon  high 
and  Christian  minds.  The  doctrine  of  Catholic  unity, 
as  stated  in  this  work,  is  represented  to  them  as  highly 
uncharitable,  and  at  variance  with  the  love  of  God,  be- 
cause it  is  assumed  that  all  communities  which  have  for- 
feited their  inheritance  in  the  one  body  have  thereby  for- 
feited the  character  of  a  Church,  and  that  all  believers  in 
Christ  in  these  communities  have  forfeited  their  hope  of 
salvation.     It  is  therefore  assumed  to  be  the  more  chari- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  287 

table  conclusion,  that  the  one  Church  is  of  a  latitude  to 
comprehend  them  also  in  its  visible  pale.  Some  would 
have  it  to  consist  of  all  Christian  people  ;  but  this  is  only 
shifting  the  difficulty  of  the  question :  some,  of  all  who 
believe  the  essentials  of  the  Gospel;  but  no  two  men  can 
agree  in  stating  what  these  essentials  are  :  some,  of  all 
who  live  a  holy  life ;  but  this  denies  even  the  visibleness 
of  the  Church  :  and  some,  again,  of  all  who  believe  the 
ultimate  facts  of  the  Gospel ;  but  this  would  hold  in  its 
embrace  those  that  deny  the  Godhead  of  our  Redeemer. 
AH  these  mutually  exclusive  and  self-destructive  theories 
are  so  many  attempts  to  bring  the  outlying  phenomena 
of  God's  continuous  providential  and  unrevealed  govern- 
ment under  the  positive  institution  of  His  revealed  will. 
As  if  we  must  know  all  His  ways ;  as  if  God's  wisdom 
were  either  not  manifold,  or  were  revealed  to  the  last 
idea.  And  this  is  often  done  out  of  a  mistaken  feehng 
of  charity ;  and,  as  such,  it  deserves  no  sharper  check 
than  that  which  Peter  received,  when  feelings  of  care  and 
charity  for  a  brother  apostle  led  him  to  press  forward  be- 
yond the  line  of  Christ's  declared  mind,  '•  What  is  that 
to  thee  ?  Follow  thou  me."^  But  we  will  pass  from  the 
temper  which  predisposes  men  towards  this  charitable 
hope,  to  the  paralogism  by  which  they  impose  upon  their 
judgment.  They  believe  it,  because  they  hope  it.  But 
it  must  be  remembered  that  hope  and  belief  are  not  rela- 
tive things.  Hope  and  fear,  belief  and  disbelief,  are  the 
real  antagonists.  We  believe  or  disbelieve  according  to 
the  evidence  for  any  fact ;  we  hope  or  fear  according  to 
the  character  and  consequences  of  the  fact  either  proved, 
or  probable  upon  the  evidence  proposed.  Our  hope  may 
not,  any  more  than  our  fear,  overrule  our  belief.  Either 
way  we  are  merely  deceiving  ourselves;  the  feeling  of 
our  nature  is  usurping  a  tyranny  over  our  reason  and 

1)   St.  Jolin  xxi.  20—22. 


288  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

conscience.  In  fact,  they  who  disbeheve  the  eternity  of 
punishment  because  they  fear  it,  and  they  who  beheve 
the  indefinite  theory  of  Catholic  unity  because  they  hope 
it  to  be  true,  must  be  classed  in  the  same  category,  though 
the  moral  affections  be  diametrically  opposed.  In  both 
cases,  evidence  is  made  to  yield  to  the  wishes,  and  the 
reason  to  the  will. 

Again,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  endeavours  of 
modern  times  to  construct  a  theory  w^hich  shall  embrace 
all  the  anomalies  of  Christendom  are  most  narrow  and 
partial.  It  is  argued  that  the  condition  of  so  large  a 
body  of  Christians,  perhaps  thirty  or  forty  millions  in 
number,  who  have  forl'eited  the  Apostolical  succession, 
claims  at  our  hands  some  concession.  Whether  we  are 
appointed  of  God  to  make  such  concessions  from  His  in- 
stitutions, whether  this  giving  of  largess  of  that  which  is 
another's  may  not  bring  us  under  the  condemnation  of 
the  steward  who  wasted  his  master's  goods,  is  a  matter 
to  be  considered  by  all  serious  men.  But  waiving  this 
point,  it  seems  always  forgotten  that  all  Christendom  for 
fifteen  hundred  years,  and  more  than  five-sixths  of  Chris- 
tendom from  the  Apostles  to  this  day,  have  ever  stayed 
their  belief  on  the  promises  of  Christ  made  to  His  one 
Catholic  Church.  They  that  are  concerned  to  establish 
a  looser  theory,  how  numerous  soever  when  taken  by 
themselves,  are  a  small  fraction  of  the  Christendom  of 
to-day,  and  as  a  handful  compared  with  the  multitudes 
of  Christians  who  from  the  beginning  have  lived,  hoped, 
suffered,  and  died  in  another  trust. 

But,  lastly,  I  have  endeavoured  to  show  that  the  sup- 
posed consequences  of  this  Catholic  doctrine  do  not  in 
fact  flow  from  it.  It  is  one  thing  to  assert  that  there  is 
no  proof  that  God  has  revealed  another  way  of  salva- 
tion besides  the  one  Church,  and  another  thing  to  say 
that  all  concerning  whom   God  has  revealed  nothing 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  289 

shall  certainly  be  lost.  This  no  man  dare  say;  nor  does 
it  follow  from  the  principle  here  affirmed.  The  shallow- 
est logician  can  tell  us  that  between  the  propositions, 
"  All  that  live  faithfully  in  the  one  Church  shall  be 
saved,"  and  "  None  that  are  out  of  the  one  Church  shall 
be  saved,"  there  is  neither  by  conversion  nor  by  infer- 
ence any  imaginable  connexion. 

But,  once  more,  let  it  be  observed  that  w^e  have  as- 
certained a  plain  and  sufficient  principle,  by  which  we 
may  well  and  surely  believe  in  the  salvation  of  all  those 
who  bring  forth  the  fruits  of  repentance  and  faith,  and  of 
no  others,  whether  they  be  heirs  of  the  one  Church,  or 
disinherited  of  their  birthright,  or  never  so  much  as  in- 
cluded within  the  precincts  of  Christendom.  In  all  such 
the  one  inscrutable  Spirit  dwells,  and  they  are  one  in  an 
unconscious  and  invisible  unity;  while  the  conscious  and 
visible  unity  of  the  Church  Cathohc  stands  unshaken. 
This  will  remain  a  fact,  a  phenomenon,  a  mystery,  a  sa- 
crament, a  witness  of  manifold  wisdom  revealed  and  un- 
revealed,  to  the  world's  end.  At  the  same  time  we  have 
seen  reason  to  believe  that  they  who  forfeit  the  unity  of 
the  Church  place  themselves,  or  are  placed  by  others,  at 
a  grave  disadvantage — it  may  be  in  a  great  peril ;  and 
this  by  the  forfeiture  of  the  mystical,  moral,  and  doctrinal 
media,  and  helps,  to  holiness  and  everlasting  life.  And 
this  great  law  the  analogy  of  all  God's  dealings,  natural 
and  revealed,  confirms ;  as,  for  instance,  disease  follow- 
ing sin,  inherited  poverty,  and  the  like :  and,  again,  the 
removing  of  the  candlestick  for  the  fathers'  sins,  the  state 
of  the  Asiatic  and  African  Churches,  the  folds  of  Cyril 
and  Clement,  of  Cyprian  and  Augustin,  at  this  day. 


CHAPTER    III 


THE    LOSS    OF    SUBJECTIVE    UNITT. 


It  now  remains  for  us  to  consider  the  last  form  of  the 
subject  before  us,  namely,  the  condition  of  those  Chris- 
tian churclies  which,  retaining  the  objective  unity  of  doc- 
trine and  discipline,  have  forfeited  the  subjective  unity  of 
inter-communion. 

I  have  already  shown  that  this  subjective  unity  is  one 
proximate  final  end  for  which  the  objective  unity  is  or- 
dained ;  and  that  it  is  the  matter  of  probation,  duty,  and 
responsibility  to  the  individual  Christian,  and  to  the  sev- 
eral churches  of  the  Catholic  communion. 

The  first  instance  we  may  take  is  that  of  the  Dona- 
tist  schism.  It  is  true  that  this  case  does  not  fall  with 
absolute  strictness  under  the  enunciation  of  our  present 
question  ;  and  yet  it  is  for  the  most  part  included  in  it, 
and  it  has  no  approximation  to  any  other  division  of  the 
subject.  The  Donatist  schism  is  an  example  of  the  for- 
feiture of  subjective  unity  in  a  particular  Church  by  the 
establishment  of  a  rival  succession  of  bishops.  Only  one 
of  these  could  be  the  lawful  succession,  though  both  were 
undoubtedly  valid.  It  is  unnecessary  to  go  further  into 
history  than  to  state  that,  on  the  vacancy  of  the  see  of 
Carthage,  a  division  was  made  in  the  choice  and  conse- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  291 

cration  of  a  successor.  Csecilianus  being  lawfully  elect- 
ed and  consecrated,  the  antagonist  party  objected  that 
one  of  his  consecrators,  Felix  of  Aptungus,  had  been  a 
traditor  in  the  Dioclesian  persecution.  This,  with  other 
accusations  against  Csecilianus,  formed  their  pretext  for 
electing  and  consecrating  Majorinus.  There  were 
thenceforward  two  successions  in  the  African  Churches, 
and  afterwards  in  Gaul  and  Rome  also.  In  Africa  the 
Donatist  body  for  a  time  were  the  majority,  and  their 
bishops  outnumbered  the  Catholic.  The  rival  succes- 
sion maintained  itself  for  more  than  a  hundred  years. 
The  characteristic  temper  of  the  two  bodies  is  remarka- 
ble. The  Donatists  denounced  the  Catholics  as  idola- 
trous and  defiled,  re-ordained  and  re-baptized  all  con- 
verts, assumed  exclusively  to  themselves  the  title  of 
Catholic,  and  taught  that  the  whole  Catholic  Church, 
except  themselves,  was  fallen  from  Christ.  It  is  not  to  our 
present  purpose  to  go  into  the  detail  of  their  pride,  covet- 
ousness,  violence,  and  rebellion.  I  am  speaking  of  them 
only  as  a  phenomenon  in  relation  to  the  objective  Unity 
of  the  Church.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Catholics  ac- 
knowledged them  as  Christians,  called  them  brethren,* 
recognized  the  orthodoxy  of  their  faith  and  the  validity 
of  their  Sacraments,  They  denied  only  that  they  be- 
longed to  the  one  Church,  and  that  because  they  had 
broken  the  bond  of  unity  by  erecting  a  rival  succession 
and  a  rival  altar  in  churches  of  apostolical  foundation. 
Their  act  of  internal  schism  cut  them  off  from  the  unity 
of  their  own  churches,  and  thereby  from  the  Church  uni- 
versal. It  must  be  always  borne  in  mind  that  their 
schism  began  by  withdrawing  from  the  communion  of 
their  lawful  bishops.  It  was  a  schism  in  a  Diocese,  and 
a  rivalry  of  successions  in  a  Diocesan  Church.     To  this 

1)  S.  Aug.  de  Baptismo,  lib.  i.  xv.     See  also  Letter  of  Bishop  Bedell  to 
Mr,  Waddes worth,  Life,  p,  284, 


293        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

we  may  apply  most  of  our  conclusions  respecting  those 
who  have  forfeited  the  objective  Unity  of  the  Church.  It 
is  true  that  the  Donatists  possessed  a  valid  succession 
and  valid  Sacraments.  Even  though  their  schism  was 
most  stubborn  and  turbulent,  yet  still  the  Catholics  ac- 
knowledged in  them  all  that  was  of  God,  all  that  belong- 
ed to  the  Church,  all  that  they  had  carried  with  them 
out  of  the  unity  of  the  one  body  of  Christ.  They  de- 
clared that  their  acts  were  valid,  though  the  efficacy  was 
suspended.  The  saving  power,  they  taught,  was  in  the 
one  Church,  to  which  by  reconciliation,  with  imposition 
of  hands,  they  might  still  be  joined,  so  as  to  make  the 
Sacraments  received  in  schism  avail  to  the  salvation  of 
their  souls.  To  the  Donatist  clergy  they  offered  a  recog- 
nition of  their  orders,  and  to  their  bishops  the  next  suc- 
cession after  the  death  of  the  present  Catholic  possessor 
of  the  see.  To  these  principles  the  Catholic  Church  still 
adhered,  even  after  the  repeated  decisions  of  councils 
and  appeals  had  condemned  the  Donatists  as  formal  and 
pertinacious  schismatics,  and  after  the  bloody  and  anti- 
christian  acts  of  their  adherents  had  confirmed  the  jus- 
tice of  the  sentence  in  the  face  of  Christendom. 

The  next  form  of  the  question  is  that  of  forfeited  unity, 
or  suspended  communion  between  two  or  more  apostol- 
ical Churches.  It  is  to  be  observed  that,  as  the  last  was 
internal,  so  this  is  external  separation.  Of  this  there  may 
be  two  kinds ;  as,  for  instance,  when  the  Churches  so  at 
variance  are  either  still  in  communion  with  some  third 
portion  of  the  Church  universal,  or  not. 

Of  the  former  kind  was  the  breach  between  Victor 
and  the  Roman  Church  on  one  side,  and  Polycrates  and 
the  Asiatic  Churches  on  the  other,  on  the  subject  of  the 
quarto-deciman  rule  ;  and  also,  at  a  later  time,  between 
Stephen  and  St.  Cyprian  on  the  subject  of  re-baptizing; 
and  between  the  Roman  and  African  Churches  on  the 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.        293 

subject  of  appeals.  In  the  latter  case  St.  Augustin,  Eu- 
genins,  Fulgentius,  were  all  involved  in  upholding  the 
apostolical  commission  of  the  African  Churches,  and  in 
all  probability  departed  this  life  while  as  yet  the  breach 
was  unhealed.^  In  these  cases  both  parties  were  still  in 
communion  with  other  and  the  same  churches. 

Of  the  latter  kind  is,  first,  the  division  of  the  Eastern 
and  Western  Churches.  Although  for  some  time  they 
still  continued  partially  to  communicate  with  other 
churches,  yet  at  the  last  they  were  completely  divided. 
The  Christian  world  was  sundered ;  and  the  two  great 
members  had  no  third  or  common  body  to  unite  them. 
They  were  in  point  of  extent  so  nearly  equal  that  each 
claimed  to  be  the  greater;^  and  no  one  can  venture  to 
award  between  them.  They  mutually  charged  each  the 
other  with  heresy  and  schism ;  and  history  abundantly 
proves  that  they  were  both  in  fault — the  Greeks  by  vio- 
lence, the  Latins  by  ambition :  the  Greeks  denouncing 
the  addition  of  the  words  "  Filioque  "  as  heretical,  which 
they  are  not;  the  Latins  requiring  the  acceptance  of 
them  as  if  they  had  the  sanction  of  a  General  Council, 
which  they  do  not  possess:  but  be. the  faults  of  the  Greek 
Churches  never  so  great,  they  cannot  be  laid  in  the  bal- 
ance against  the  usurpation  of  a  supreme  pontificate  by 
the  Bishop  of  Rome.  This  attempt  of  the  Roman  Patri- 
arch to  subject  the  four  Eastern  Patriarchates  to  his  ex- 
aggerated jurisdiction  is  a  claim  which,  so  long  as  per- 
sisted in,  must  throw  upon  the  Roman  Church  the  sin  of 
keeping  open  an  inveterate  schism.  The  most  learned 
and  candid  writers  of  that  communion  have  lonof  ao-o 
acknowledged  that  the  conduct  of  the  Roman  Church  in 
thrusting  bishops  and  clergy  into  the  Eastern  Churches 

1)  Laud's  Conference  with  Fisher,  pp.  113,  114.  Ed.  1686. 

2)  Nectarius  adv.  Imp.  Papse,  253.    Palmer's  Treatise  on  the   Church, 
vol.  i.  p.  203. 


294         THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

was  unjustifiable  on  any  principle  but  that  of  providing 
Latin  rites  for  members  of  the  Latin  Church  dwelling  or 
detained  in  the  East ;  and  that  the  vain  theory  on  which 
it  is  persevered  in  is  one  chief  cause  of  irreconcilable 
alienation.'  For  seven  or  eight  hundred  years  this  sepa- 
ration has  been  complete  ;  and  for  four  hundred  all  sys- 
tematic efforts  at  reconciliation  may  be  said  to  have 
ceased.^  Now  no  man  can  diligently  examine  and  sum 
up  the  charges  on  either  side  without  being  thoroughly 
satisfied  that,  if  a  more  petulant  temper  be  found  among 
the  Greeks,  yet  the  formal  and  positive  causes  of  division 
are  to  be  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  Roman  Church.  One 
instance  will  sufficej  namely,  in  the  extravagant  and  in- 
tolerable claim  of  universal  supremacy. 

Upon  these  grounds,  it  may  be  safely  concluded  that 
on  neither  side  is  there  either  formal  heresy  or  schism  of 
such  a  kind  as  to  cut  either  of  them  off  from  the  one  visi- 
ble Church,  and  from  communion  with  the  one  Head  of 
the  Church  in  heaven.  Although  on  both  sides  a  most 
grievous  wrong  and  wound  is  done  to  the  body  of  Christ, 
yet  on  both  sides  there  may  be  salvation.  Both,  with 
their  respective  obscurations  of  the  light  of  truth,  and 
with  the  virtual  denial  of  parts  by  consequence,  yet  retain 
the  whole  faith.  Both,  with  their  characteristic  irregu- 
larities, retain  the  whole  discipline  of  Christ.  In  the  ob- 
jective unity  they  are  still  one  ;  in  their  great  moral  pro- 
bation they  have  grievously  fallen :  without  doubt,  the 
peculiar  faults  of  both  are  aggravated  and  made  invete- 
rate by  division.  The  suspension  of  communion  has 
deprived  them  of  the  mutual  check  and  mitigating  influ- 
ence of  each  on  the  other,  by  which  they  might  both  have 
ripened  to  perfection.     In  the  stead  of  this  healthy  disci- 

1)  Fleury,  Sixieme  Discoura  sur  I'Histoiro  Ecclesiastique,  s.  ix.  vol. 
xviii.  p.  xiv. 

2)  Fiom  the  Council  of  Florence,  a.  d.  1450. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH.         295 

pline  have  come  between  them  the  irritations  of  defeated 
ambition  and  jealous  resentment.  Although  the  moral 
habit  of  both  Churches  is  severely  injured  by  this  unholy 
strife,  yet  they  have  Sacraments  both  valid  in  themselves 
and  efficacious  to  the  saving  of  souls  ;  they  have  the  true 
knowledge  of  God,  and  the  perfect  traditionary  type  of 
ihe  divine  image,  and  the  divinely-appointed  discipline 
and  probation  of  man's  moral  being.  They  are,  in  fact, 
members  of  the  One  Holy  Catholic  Church,  and,  though 
their  mutual  fellowship  is  suspended,  they  have  all  other 
blessings  of  which  the  One  Church  is  the  shrine  and 
treasury. 

I  now  come  to  the  last  form  of  the  question  in  hand, 
namely,  the  suspension  of  communion  betwen  the  Ro- 
man and  English  Churches.  The  same  chief  causes 
which  divided  the  Eastern  from  the  Western  Churches 
divided  also  the  Western  Church  itself.  It  would  seem 
as  if  the  same  causes  of  provocation,  when  they  were 
baffled  by  the  Greeks,  fell  with  a  more  intolerable  weight 
upon  the  West  of  Europe.  The  same  exaggerated  claim 
of  universal  jurisdiction  was  the  cause  of  division  in  both 
cases.  This  is  more  conspicuously  so  in  the  West,  where, 
through  the  silent  working  of  ages,  and  by  the  aid  of 
closer  sympathies  and  bonds  of  mind  and  language,  the 
doctrinal  teaching  of  the  Roman  Church  had  for  the  most 
part  quietly  established  itself.  There  was  no  question 
about  leavened  bread  in  the  Eucharist,  or  about  "  Fili- 
oque"  in  the  Creed,  or  the  fire  of  purgatorJ^  The  whole 
matter  resolved  itself  into  the  claim  of  supreme  jurisdic- 
tion. If  any  man  will  look  down  along  the  line  of  early 
English  history,  he  will  see  a  standing  contest  between 
the  rulers  of  this  land  and  the  bishops  of  Rome.  The 
Crown  and  Church  of  England,  with  a  steady  opposition, 
resisted  the  entrance  and  encroachment  of  the  secular- 
ized ecclesiastical  power  of  the  Pope  in  England.    The 


296        THE  UNITY  OP  THE  CHURCH. 

last  rejection  of  it  was  no  more  than  a  successful  effort 
after  many  a  failure  in  struggles  of  the  like  kind.  And  it 
was  an  act  taken  by  men  who  were  sound,  according  to 
the  Roman  doctrines,  in  all  other  points.'  Questions  of 
Faith  had  hardly  as  yet  arisen  in  the  Church  of  England 
when  it  released  its  apostolical  powers  from  the  oppres- 
sion of  a  foreign  and  uncanonical  jurisdiction.  The  cor- 
rections in  doctrine  and  usage  which  were  afterwards 
made  were  neither  the  causes  of  the  beginning  nor  of 
the  continuance  of  the  division.  It  was  believed  that  the 
state  of  the  Anglican  Church  would  have  been  for  the 
most  part  confirmed  by  the  See  of  Rome  on  the  submis- 
sion of  the  Q,ueen.^  There  is  no  one  point  in  which  the 
British  Churches  can  be  attainted  of  either  heresy  or 
schism.  As  for  heresy,  they  openly  profess  the  canoni- 
cal Scriptures,  the  Catholic  Creeds,  the  first  six  General 
Councils,  rejecting,  with  the  Council  of  Frankfort,  the 
seventh,  which  alone,  in  addition  to  the  first  six,  is  re- 
ceived by  the  Greek  Church  ;  and  with  the  Greek  Church, 
rejecting  all  subsequent  councils  of  the  Western  Church 
untruly  pretending  to  be  (Ecumenical.  With  these  also 
they  acknowledge  all  true  apostolical  traditions,  and  sub- 
mit themselves  in  preparation  of  mind  to  the  definitions 
of  a  free  and  lawful  General  Council.  This  is  enough,  if 
the  confession  of  their  adversaries  were  wanting,  to  clear 
them  of  heresy.  As  for  schism,  they  have  done  no  more 
than  take  from  off  their  neck  a  yoke  which  Christ  never 
laid  upon  it,  and  that,  too,  not  when  it  was  meekly  im- 
posed, but  when,  through  the  wickedness  of  men,  it  be- 
came intolerable.  Where  is  the  charity  and  the  ingenu- 
ousness of  Romanist  writers,  who  make  much  ado  to 
show  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  from  the  beginning 
possessed  of  a  lawful  patriarchal  jurisdiction  over  the 

1)  Bramhall'3  Works,  '  Just  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England,'  p.  62. 

2)  Camden's  Hist,  of  Elizabeth,  pp.  46,  47. 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  297 

British  Churches  ?     This  is  not  the  question.     Even  if 
that,  which  has  not  yet  been  proved  or  made  so  much  as 
likely,  were  conceded,  it  would  not  establish  the  conclu- 
sion which  they  would  impose  on  unwary  minds.     To  a 
patriarchal  power  limited  by  the  canons  of  the  Church, 
and  exercised  in  conformity  with   them,  it  remains  to  be 
seen  what  objection  the  English  Church  might  have  to 
raise.     But  this  is  an  issue  to  which  it  has  never  been 
honestly  brought.      Premises  are  advanced  to  show  a 
patriarchal  jurisdiction,  but,  "  currente  rota,"  in  the  con- 
clusion  we  find   a  supreme  pontificate.      The  Eastern 
Churches  never  denied  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  his  lawful 
patriarchal  power.     They  professed  it,  and  offered  all 
precedence   to  it.     Neither   has  the   Anglican  Church 
been  called  on  to  debate  the  issue  on  this  footing.     She 
has  rejected — what  the  Eastern  Churches  rejected  be- 
fore— the  arrogant  pretence  of  an  universal  pontificate 
rashly  alleged  to  be  of  divine  right,  imposed  in  open 
breach  of  apostolical  traditions,  and  the  canons  of  many 
councils.     The  Churches  of  the  East  are  not  schismatical 
for  their   rejection  of  this  usurpation;    neither  are   the 
Churches  of  Britain.     But  they  are  guilty  of  the  schism 
that  obtrude  this  novelty  as  the  condition  of  Christian 
communion.     Nor,  again,  would  the  British  Churches  be 
open  to  the  lightest  imputation  of  schism,  if  they  were, 
with  the  usurped  pontificate,  to  remove  also  the  supposed 
patriarchal  jurisdiction  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome.     For  the 
patriarchal  authority  is  itself  founded  on  the  very  canons 
to  which  the  pontiff  refuses  to  submit.     The  defeat  of  his 
canonical  privileges  is  with  himself.     He  will  not  exer- 
cise them  as  they  are  intrusted  to  him  ;  and  the  canons 
demand  obedience  on  no  other  condition. 

The  attempt  to  impose  an  uncanonical  jurisdiction  on 
the  British  Churches,  and  a  refusal  to  hold  communion 
with  them,  except  on  that  condition,  is  an  act  of  formal 

14 


298        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

schism.  And  this  is  further  aggravated  by  every  kind  of 
aggression :  acts  of  excommunication,  and  anathema,  in- 
stigations to  warfare  abroad,  and  to  rebellion  and  schism 
at  home,  are  the  measures  by  which  the  Roman  Church 
has  exhibited  its  professed  desire  to  restore  unity  to  the 
Churcli  of  Christ.  It  must  never  be  forgotten  that  the 
act  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  by  which  a  most  grievous  and 
stubborn  schism  was  begun  in  the  EngHsh  Church,  was 
taken  not  in  the  character  of  patriarch,  but  in  the  title  of 
Supreme  Pontiff.  Tiie  same  buh  which  made  a  schism 
in  every  Enghsh  diocese  professed  to  depose  also  the 
Q,ueen  of  England.  It  was  a  power  to  give  away  not 
sees,  but  thrones  also ;  and  the  effect  of  this  has  been,  as 
in  the  East  so  in  England,  to  erect  altar  against  altar, 
and  succession  against  succession.  In  the  erection  of 
schism  in  diocesan  churches,  in  the  exclusive  assumption 
of  the  name  Catholic,  in  the  reordination  of  priests,  and 
in  restricting  the  One  Church  to  their  own  communion, 
there  has  been  no  such  example  of  schism  since  the 
schism  of  Donatus. 

The  conduct,  also,  of  the  English  Church  is  strictly 
parallel  with  that  of  the  African.  She  acknowledges  the 
members  of  the  Roman  Church  as  CJiristians,  cahs  them 
brethren,  recognizes  their  faith  and  Sacraments,  admits 
their  orders,  and  receives  those  that  come  to  her  commun- 
ion without  so  much  as  conditional  baptism.  She  ac- 
knowledges the  body  of  Christ  in  all  churches  which  are 
neither  in  heresy  noi*  schism  ;  she  excommunicates  none  ; 
she  prays  for  all,  and  is,  in  heart  and  desire,  at  unity 
with  those  that  refuse  communion  to  her.  So  much,  then, 
for  the  imputations  of  heresy  and  schism. 

The  suspension,  therefore,  of  communion  between  the 
Churches  of  England  and  Rome  is  no  hindrance  to  the 
obtaining  of  salvation  on  both  sides.  It  would  be  beyond 
my  present  purpose  to  go  into  the  question  of  the  com- 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  299 

parative  openness  of  the  way  to  life  in  the  two  Churches, 
of  the  means  of  knowledge  and  grace,  and  the  fostering 
and  disposing  causes  which  tend  towards  salvation.  All 
that  need  be  shown  is  that  on  both  sides  the  whole  ob- 
jective system  of  doctrine  and  discipline,  a  valid  and  law- 
ful succession,  with  valid  and  efficacious  sacraments,  are 
retained  ;  so  that  no  man  can  perish  but  through  sins  of 
his  own,  which  would  alike  destroy  him  in  the  purest 
Church  of  the  earliest  times.  That  such  is  the  condition 
of  the  Roman  Church,  in  spite  of  the  corrupt  traditions 
and  ensnaring  doctrines  with  which  it  is  darkened  and 
disfigured,  we  gladly  acknowledge.  And  whatsoever 
the  designing  or  the  deceived  among  them  may  say  of 
the  English  Church,  she  knows  too  well  the  Catholic  tra- 
ditions to  lend  much  heed  to  their  unreasonable  crimina- 
tions. She  is  clear  from  any  position  or  practice  which 
can  bring  her  under  even  the  surmise  of  heresy  and 
schism ;  and  in  all  her  dealing  with  those  that  anathe- 
matize her,  she  would  follow  His  temper  who  bids  us 
render  "  not  railing  for  railing,  but  contrariwise  blessing." 
Such  being  her  state  and  posture  of  heart,  she  freely  en- 
joys spiritual  communion  with  Christ  the  Head  of  all,  and 
with  His  mystical  body,  the  "  garden  inclosed,  the  foun- 
tain sealed,  the  spring  of  living  water,"  and  with  all  the 
saints  of  God  in  the  court  of  heaven. 


GENERAL    CONCLUSION. 


Having  now  gone,  as  far  as  I  have  been  able,  through 
the  course  of  the  subject,  I  may  shortly  state  the  sum  of 
the  Catholic  doctrine  of  unity,  and  with  a  few  obvious  re- 
marks bring  this  work  to  an  end. 

We  have  seen,  then,  that  there  is  a  doctrine  of  unity, 
which,  as  a  part  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  is  the  matter  of 
a  Christian  man's  behef :  we  have  found  that  doctrine  to 
be  a  part  of  the  first  elements  of  Christian  faith,  professed 
by  every  candidate  for  baptism  :  we  have  found  also  that 
the  testimony  of  inspired  and  uninspired  men  delivers  to 
us  one  definite  and  consistent  scheme  of  unity,  which  ac- 
cords both  with  the  moral  design  of  God  revealed  in 
Holy  Scripture,  and  with  the  moral  government  of  God 
unfolded  in  the  history  of  mankind.  The  one  Church, 
then,  is  the  one  only  body  to  which,  by  the  act  of  God, 
the  salvation  of  Christ  is  by  revealed  pledges  assured ; 
and  this  one  only  body  is  proposed  to  us  as  an  object 
both  of  faiih  and  of  sense.  It  is  an  object  of  faith  in  so  far 
as  it  is  invisible ;  and  an  object  of  sense  in  so  far  as  it  is 
visible  in  the  world.  It  is  invisible  in  so  far  as  it  com- 
prehends retrospectively  all  saints,  from  righteous  Abel 
to  this  day,  now  gathered  in  the  world  unseen;  and  pros- 
pectively all  who  by  the  election  of  God  shall  hereafter 
be  made  members  of  it  unto  the  end  of  time.  It  is  visible 
in  60  far  as,  throughout  the  whole  world,  there  is  a  body 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  301 

of  men  professing  the  Catholic  faith  under  their  lawful 
pastors  ;  although  to  each  man  only  that  particular  por- 
tion in  which  his  own  regeneration  has  been  ordained  is 
truly  visible.  But  it  is  this  member  of  the  Church  Cath- 
olic which  is  to  each  man  the  witness  of  the  whole.  It  is 
to  him  the  symbol  of  the  whole  object  of  faith,  and  the 
representative  of  the  whole  subject  of  sense.  The  Dio- 
cesan Church  is  to  him  the  pledge  of  the  Church  Univer- 
sal,— ecclesia  in  Episcopo.  His  own  pastor,  and  the 
altar  where  he  communicates  in  the  Eucharistical  sacri- 
fice, is  the  test  and  the  centre  of  all  duties  and  obliga- 
tions of  love  and  loyalty ;  and  to  it  he  does  the  homage 
which  he  owes  to  the  one  holy  Church  throughout  all  the 
world.  Such  is  the  actual  and  the  representative  char- 
acter of  every  Catholic  altar.  It  is  both  an  integral  por- 
tion and  a  proxy  of  the  whole  Church,  and  a  discipline 
and  probation  of  the  whole  man. 

Now.  upon  the  sum  of  this  doctrine  I  would  make  one 
or  two  remarks.  And,  first  of  all,  it  must  be  observed 
that  the  doctrine  of  unity  here  affirmed  is  grounded  upon 
the  positive  ordinances  and  revelations  of  God.  It  is  a 
doctrine  antecedent  to  the  realization  of  unity  in  the 
Church  ;  an  objective  idea  declared  by  revelation  ante- 
cedent to  its  objective  manifestation  in  the  world.  The 
importance  of  this  remark  will  be  felt  when  it  is  remem- 
bered how  easily  and  almost  certainly  the  mind  of  man 
is  biassed  by  the  phenomenei,  whether  truly  or  falsely  ap- 
prehended, which  appear  before  his  eyes.  The  under- 
standing is  perpetually  usurping  upon  the  reason,  first 
thrusting  upon  it  false  deductions,  and  then  limiting  its 
clearer  and  broader  perceptions  by  the  narrow  reach  of 
observation.  As  so  many  instances  of  this  may  be  taken 
the  many  theories  of  Catholic  unity ;  each  one  being  a 
consequence  of  some  imaginary  principle  assumed  either 
d  priorij  from  anticipations  of  what  it  should  be,  or,  d 


302  THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

posteriori,  from  observation  of  the  existing  anomalies  of 
Christendom.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  most  theories 
of  Church  unity  are  nothing  more  than  either  pious  and 
charitable  endeavours  to  adjust  a  scheme  which  shall 
embrace  all  professing  Christians,  or  a  refined  hypothe- 
sis which  shall  serve  some  proximate  design.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  the  reason  why  many  minds  abandon 
the  doctrine  of  unity,  as  it  was  believed  by  Christendom 
for  fifteen  hundred  years,  is  that  they  are  at  a  loss  how 
to  square  with  it  the  anomalies  of  the  last  three  centu- 
ries. But  for  the  unhappy  rending  of  the  Western 
Church,  no  man  would  have  any  more  dreamed  of  gain- 
saying the  mystery  of  the  visible  Church  than  of  the  visi- 
ble Sacraments.  Men's  minds  have  been  bribed  by  their 
wishes,  or  perplexed  by  their  difficulties,  into  lower  and 
looser  conceptions  of  unity.  The  doctrine  here  affirmed 
is  affected  by  no  such  prejudice.  It  is  a  definite  and  sub- 
stantive part  of  the  original  revelation;  a  mystery,  a 
positive  institution,  having  its  basis  in  the  wisdom  and 
will  of  God.  Its  partial  realization  in  the  world,  its  many 
seeming  defeats,  and  apparent  anomalies,  make  no  more 
against  the  truth  and  certainty  of  it  than  the  contraven- 
tion of  immutable  morality,  the  difficulties  in  the  proba- 
tion of  individual  men,  and  the  partial  extent  of  Chris- 
tianity against  the  Gospel  itself 

And  this  brings  me  to  a  second  remark,  namely,  that 
this  doctrine  of  unity  can  be  shown  to  be  false  only  by 
evidence  the  same  in  kind  with  that  by  which  it  has  been 
here  shown  to  be  true,  namely,  by  the  Holy  Scripture, 
and  by  the  consent  and  practice  of  the  Church,  down  to 
the  time  when  the  first  anomalies  arose  on  the  face  of 
Christendom.  It  must  be  perfectly  obvious  to  every 
reasoning  mind,  that  the  condition  of  a  part  of  Western 
Europe  during  the  last  three  centuries  cannot  avail  to 
unsettle  the  fixed  rule  of  the  Catholic  Church  for  fifteen 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH.  303 

hundred  years.  We  may,  indeed,  be  unable  to  find  any 
common  term  under  which  to  bring  both  ihe  Apostohcal 
Churches  and  the  self-originated  communities  of  Christen- 
dom. It  is  impossible  to  find  any  scheme  which  shall  not 
either  exclude  those  communities  from  the  unity  of  the 
Church,  or  assert  a  right  in  man  to  make  and  unmake 
the  conditions  of  his  own  probation.  It  is  very  true  that 
the  later  history  of  the  Church  presents  us  with  anomalies 
we  know  not  how  to  deal  with ;  we  cannot  explain, 
classify,  or  neglect  them.  They  meet  us  in  the  attitude 
of  objections;  and  they  put  our  faith  on  trial.  But,  after 
all,  they  are  to  the  Church  no  more  than  the  inconsist- 
encies and  eccentric  movements  of  individual  character. 
These  also  are  facts  too  visible  to  be  denied,  too  exorbi- 
tant to  be  brought  under  the  one  law  which  harmonizes 
our  moral  life :  they  must  be  reserved  to  the  judgment  of 
Him  who  weigheth  the  spirits.  So  with  the  communities 
of  Christians  who  have  broken  from  the  unity  of  the  one 
Church.  They  are  too  visible  to  be  overlooked,  too  full  of 
anomaly  to  be  brought  under  the  rule  which  runs  through 
the  one  Church  of  Christ.  They  must  be  remanded  to 
the  judgment  of  Him  that  walketh  in  the  midst  of  the 
Golden  Candlesticks.  Let  us  "  judge  nothing  before  the 
time  ;"  still  less  try  to  escape  our  difficulties  by  changing 
the  ordinance  of  God.  It  may  be  that  in  this  very  per- 
plexity lies  a  great  part  of  our  own  moral  probation. 

And,  lastly,  the  doctrine  of  Catholic  unity  is  both  defi- 
nite in  itself,  and  direct  in  its  bearing  upon  practice.  It 
is  as  definite  as  all  the  other  articles  of  our  baptismal 
creed ;  and  it  thereby  delivers  the  minds  of  Christian 
men  from  the  entanglements  of  a  thousand  controversies. 
The  Catholic  Christian  is  not  set  to  seek  out  the  one 
Church,  forasmuch  as  by  his  baptism  he  is  already  incor- 
porated in  it.  He  sees  its  oneness  and  its  holiness  in  the 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  faith  and  discipline.    They  are  to 


304        THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

him  the  landmarks  of  the  old  way,  in  which  his  feet  already 
stand.  The  multiplicity,  conflict,  novelty,  and  narrow- 
ness of  all  other  schemes  and  systems  keep  him,  by  a 
play  of  repulsive  forces,  in  the  one  aboriginal  and  uni- 
versal way  of  life.  It  is  direct  in  its  bearing  upon  prac- 
tice, forasmuch  as  it  is  not  more  a  rule  of  faith  than  of  obe- 
dience. The  duty  of  submission  and  forbearance,  of 
maintaining  unity,  of  keeping  aloof  from  all  acts  and  as- 
semblies of  schism,  flows  directly  out  of  a  belief  in  one 
holy  Church.  It  is  rather  a  life  than  a  creed  ;  and  such 
is  the  simphcityand  plainness  of  the  way,  that "  the  way- 
farer though  a  fool  shall  not  err  therein."  The  bap- 
tized man  that  steadfastly  believes  his  baptismal  creed, 
and  in  contrition  of  heart  both  meetly  partakes  of  the 
holy  Eucharist  and  watchfully  lives  in  accordance  with 
the  rule  of  that  holy  mystery,  is  not  far  from  the  kingdom 
of  heaven.  These,  and  no  others,  are  the  true  conditions 
of  Catholic  unity,  the  only  necessary  terms  of  Catholic 
communion.  More  than  this  the  Church  has  no  power, 
and  less  than  this  she  dare  not  fail  to  require  of  all 
Christian  men.  All  other  theological  verities  and  opin- 
ions ought  to  be  faithfully  taught ;  and  exterior  submis- 
sion to  all  true  definitions  may  be  exacted  of  her  mem- 
bers. She  may  impose  silence  on  doubtful  questions, 
and  yet  leave  the  interior  assent  of  men  free  unto  them- 
selves. For  all  unity,  save  in  the  objective  doctrine  and 
discipline,  is  a  moral  habit,  not  grounded  on  agreement 
of  opinion,  but  producing  it ;  resting  upon  the  unity  of 
will  to  which  it  is  pledged,  that  if  in  any  thing  we  be 
otherwise-minded  God  shall  reveal  even  that  unto  us. 

And  as  these  are  the  terms  of  unity  among  the  mem- 
bers of  each  several  Church,  so  are  they  among  the  sev- 
eral Churches  of  the  one  collective  body. 

Here,  then,  we  may  leave  the  subject  of  this  work  ; 
believing  and  hoping  that,  although  for  our  sins  the 


THE    UNITY    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


305 


Church  be  now  miserably  divided,  it  may  yet  be  once 
more  united.  Let  us  only  believe  that  it  still  retains  the 
powers  of  recovery :  we  are  divided  because  we  have  so 
little  faith  in  the  grace  of  unity.  Let  us  steadfastly  trust 
that  our  long-lost  heir-loom  will  once  more  be  found 
when  by  the  grace  of  God  the  pride  and  arrogance,  the 
selfishness,  and  contentious  spirit  of  man  are  brought 
down  to  the  primitive  traditions  of  the  one  holy  Catholic 
and  Apostolic  Church. 


J.  F.  Trow,  Printer, 
33  Ann- street. 


BOOKS 

IN   THE    VARIOUS    DEPARTMENTS 

OP 

PUBLISHED  BY 

D.  AFPIiETON   &   CO.,   NETT-YORK, 

AND 
GEORGS  S.  APPIiKTON,  PHIIiADKIiPHIA. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  REFORMATION 
OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND.  By  Gilbert  Burnet, 
D.D.,  late  Bishop  of  Salisbury.  With  a  Collection  of  Records, 
and  a  copious  Index,  revised  and  corrected,  with  additional 
Notes  and  a  Preface,  by  the  Rev.  E.  Nares,  D.D.  Illustrated 
with  a  Frontispiece  and  twenty- three  Portraits  on  steel.  Form- 
ing  four  elegant  8vo.  vols,  of  near  600  pages  each.     ^8  00. 

To  the  student  either  of  civil  or  religious  history  no  epoch  can  be  of  more 
importance  than  that  of  the  Reformation  in  England.  It  signalized  the 
overthrow,  in  one  of  its  strongest  holds,  of  the  Roman  power,  and  gave  an 
impulse  to  the  human  mind,  the  full  results  of  which  are  even  now  but 
partly  realized.  Almost  all  freedom  of  inquiry — all  toleration  in  matters  of 
religion,  had  its  birth-hour  then  ;  and  without  a  familiar  acquaintance  with 
all  its  principal  events,  but  little  progress  can  be  made  in  understanding 
the  nature  and  ultimate  tendencies  of  the  revolution  then  effected. 

The  History  of  Bishop  Burnet  is  one  of  the  most  celebrated  and  by  far 
the  most  frequently  quoted  of  any  that  has  been  written  of  this  great  event. 
Upon  the  original  pubUcation  of  the  first  volume,  it  was  received  in 
Great  Britain  with  the  loudest  and  most  extravagant  encomiums.  The 
author  received  the  thanks  of  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  and  was  request- 
ed by  tliem  to  continue  the  work.  In  continuing  it  he  had  the  assistance  of 
the  most  learned  and  eminent  divines  of  liis  time ;  and  he  confesses  his  in- 
debtedness for  important  aid  to  Lloyd,  Tillotson  and  Stillingfleet, 
three  of  the  greatest  of  England's  Bishops.  "  I  know,"  says  he,  in  his  Pre- 
face to  the  second  volume,  "  that  nothing  can  more  effectually  recommend 
this  work,  than  to  say  that  it  passed  with  their  hearty  approbation,  after 
they  had  examined  it  with  tliat  care  which  their  great  zeal  for  the  cause  con 
cerned  in  it,  and  their  goodness  to  the  author  and  freedom  with  him,  obliged 
them  to  use." 

The  present  edition  of  this  great  work  has  been  edited  with  laborious 
care  by  Dr.  Nares,  who  professes  to  have  corrected  important  errors  into 
which  the  author  fell,  and  to  have  made  such  improvements  in  the  order  of 
the  work  as  will  render  it  far  more  useful  to  the  reader  or  historical  student. 
Prehminary  explanations,"  full  and  sufficient  to  the  clear  understanding  of 
the  author,  are  given,  and  marginal  references  are  made  throughout  the 
book,  so  as  greatly  to  facilitate  and  render  accurate  its  consultation.  The 
whole  is  published  in  four  large  octavo  volumes  of  six  hundred  pages  in 
each — printed  upon  heavy  paper  in  large  and  clear  type.  It  contains  por- 
traits of  twenty-four  of  the  most  celebrated  characters  of  the  Reformation, 
and  is  issued  in  a  very  neat  style.  It  will  of  course  find  a  place  in  every 
theologian's  library — and  will,  by  no  means,  we  trust,  be  confined  to  that 
comparatively  limited  sphere. 


2         D.  Appleton  ^  Co.^s  Catalogue  of  Valuable  Works. 

BURNET    ON   "THE    XXXIX.   ARXICLES. 

An  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. By  Gilbert  Burnet,  D.D.,  late  Bishop  of  Salisbury. 
With  an  Appendix,  containing  the  Augsburg  Confession — Creed 
of  Pope  Pius  IV  ,  «Scc.  Revised  and  corrected,  with  copious 
Notes  and  additional  References,  by  the  Rev.  James  R.  Page, 
A.M.,  of  Queen's  College,  Cambridge.  In  one  handsome  8vo. 
volume.     $2  00. 

"No  Churchman,  no  Theologian,  can  stand  in  need  of  information  as  to 
the  character  or  value  of  Bishop  Burnet's  Exposition,  whicli  long  since  took 
its  fitting  place  as  one  of  the  acknowledged  and  admired  standards  of  the 
Church.  It  is  only  needful  that  we  speak  of  the  labours  of  the  editor  of  the 
present  edition,  and  these  appear  to  blend  a  fitting  modesty  with  eminent 
industry  and  judgment.  Thus,  while  Mr.  Page  has  carefully  verified,  and 
in  many  instances  corrected  and  enlarged  the  references  to  the  Fathers, 
Councils  and  other  authorities,  and  greatly  multiplied  the  Scripture  citations 
—for  the  Bishop  seems  in  many  cases  to  have  forgotten  that  his  readers 
would  not  all  be  as  familiar  with  the  Sacred  Text  as  himself,  and  might  not 
as  readily  find  a  passage  even  when  they  knew  it  existed — he  (Mr.  P.)  has 
scrupulously  left  the  text  untouched,  and  added  whatever  illustrative  mat- 
ter he  has  been  able  to  gather  in  the  form  of  Notes  and  an  Appendix. 
The  documents  collected  in  the  latter  are  of  great  and  abiding  value." 

PEARSON    ON    THE    CREED. 

An  Exposition  of  the  Creed.  By  John  Pearson,  D.D.,  late 
Bishop  of  Chester.  With  an  Appendix,  containing  the  Principal 
Greek  and  Latin  Creeds.  Revised  and  corrected  by  the  Rev. 
W.  S.  Dobson,  M.  A.,  Peterhouse,  Cambridge.     In  one  handsome 

8vo.  volume.     $2  00. 

The  following  may  be  stated  as  the  advantages  of  this  edition  over  all  others 

First — Great  care  has  been  taken  to  correct  the  numerous  errors  in  the 
references  to  the  texts  of  Scripture  which  had  crept  in  by  reason  of  the  re- 
peated editions  through  which  this  admirable  work  has  passed  ;  and  many 
references,  as  will  be  seen  on  turning  to  the  Index  of  Texts,  have  been  added. 

Secondly — The  Quotations  in  the  Notes  have  been  almost  universally 
identified  and  the  references  to  them  adjoined. 

Lastly — The  principal  Symbola  or  Creeds,  of  which  the  particular  Articles 
have  been  cited  by  the  author,  have  been  annexed  ;  and  wherever  the  ori- 
ginal writers  have  given  the  Symbola  in  a  scattered  and  disjointed  manner, 
the  detached  parts  have  been  brought  into  a  successive  and  connected  point 
of  view.  These  have  been  added  in  chronological  order  in  the  form  of  an 
Appendix. — Vide  Editor. 

Jflagee  on.  •Atonement  and,  Sacrifice* 

Discourses  and  Dissertations  on  the  Scriptural  Doctrines  of  Atone- 
ment and  Sacrifice,  and  on  the  Principal  Arguments  advanced, 
and  the  Mode  of  Reasoning  employed  by  the  Opponents  of 
those  Doctrines,  as  held  by  the  Established  Church.  By  the 
late  most  Rev.  Wm.  M'Gee,  D.D.,  Archbishop  of  Dublin. 
Two  vols,  royal  8vo.  beautifully  printed.     $5  00. 

"  This  is  one  of  the  ablest  critical  and  polemical  works  of  modem  times.  Archbishop  Magee  i 
ruly  a  maleus  herelicolum.  He  is  an  excellent  Bcholar,  nn  acute  reasoner,  and  is  possessed  of  a 
most  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  wide  field  of  argument  to  which  his  volumes  are  devoted — the 

n"3und  Biblical  information  on  a  variety  of  topic*  which  the  Archbishop  brings  forward,  must  en« 
.lis  name  to  all  lovers  of  Christianity.'" — Orm«. 


D.  Appleton  ^  Co:s  Catalogue  of  Valuable  Works.       3 

"~~  PALMER'S 

TREA-riSE    ON    THE    CHURCH. 

A  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Clirlst.  Designed  chiefly  for  the 
use  of  Students  in  Theology.  By  the  Rev.  WilUam  Palmer, 
M.A.,  of  Worcester  College,  Oxford.  Edited,  with  Notes,  by 
the  Right  Rev.  W.  R.  Whittingham,  D.D.,  Bishop  of  the  Pro- 
testant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  Diocese  of  Maryland.  Two 
vols.  8vo.,  handsomely  printed  on  fine  paper.     ^5  00. 

"  The  treatise  of  iMr.  Palmer  is  the  best  exposition  and  vindication  of  Church  Principles 
that  we  have  ever  read  ;  excelling  contemporaneous  treatises  in  depth  of  learning  and  soli- 
dity of  judgment,  as  much  as  it  excels  older  treatises  on  the  like  subjects,  in  adaptation  to 
the  wants  and  habits  of  the  age.  Of  its  influence  in  England,  where  it  has  passed  through 
two  editions,  we  have  not  the  means  to  form  an  opinion  ;  but  we  beUeve  that  in  this  country 
it  has  already,  even  before  its  reprint,  done  more  to  restore  the  sound  tone  of  Catholic  prin- 
ciples and  feeling  than  any  other  one  work  of  the  age.  The  author's  learning  and  powers  of 
combination  and  arrangement,  great  as  they  obviously  are,  are  less  remarkable  than  the  sterl- 
ing good  sense,  the  vigorous  and  solid  judgment,  which  is  everywhere  manifest  in  the  trea- 
tise, and  confers  on  it  its  distinctive  excellence.  The  style  of  the  author  is  distinguished  for 
dignity  and  masculine  energy,  while  his  tone  is  everywhere  natural;  on  proper  occasions, 
reverential;  and  always,  so  far  as  we  remember,  sufficiently  conciliatory. 

"  To  our  clergy  and  intelligent  laitj',  who  desire  to  see  the  Church  justly  discriminated 
from  Romanists  on  the  one  hand,  and  dissenting  denominations  on  the  other,  we  earnestly 
commeDd  Palmer's  Treatise  on  the  Church."— TV.  Y.  Churchman. 

PAROCHIAL    SERMONS, 

BY    JOHN    HENRY    NEWMAN,    B.D., 

Fellow  of  the  Oriel  College  and  Vicar  of  St.  Mary  the  Virgin's, 
Oxford.  The  six  volumes  of  the  London  edition  complete  in 
two  elegant  8vo.  volumes  of  upwards  of  600  pages  each.  $5  00. 

{jiCF'  Mr.  Newman's  Sermons  have  probably  attained  a  higher  character 
than  any  others  ever  published  in  tliis  country.  The  following  recom- 
mendatory letter  (is  one  of  the  many)  received  by  the  publishers  during 
their  progress  through  the  press. 

From  the  Bishop  of  North  Carolina. 

Raleigh,  Nov.  28, 1843. 
Your  letter  announcing  your  intention  to  republish  the  Parochial  Sermons  of  the  Rev.  John 
Henry  Newman,  B.D.,  Oxford,  has  given  me  sincere  pleasure.  In  complying  with  your 
request  for  my  opinion  of  them,  1  do  not  hesitate  to  say, — after  a  constant  use  of  them  in  ray 
closet,  and  an  observation  of  their  eflfect  upon  some  of  my  friends,  for  the  last  six  years,— that 
tbey  are  among  the  very  best  praciical  sermons  in  the  English  language;  that  while  they  are 
free  from  those  extravagances  of  opinion  usually  ascribed  to  the  author  of  the  90th  Tract, 
they  assert  in  the  strongest  manner  the  true  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  in  England,  and  en 
force  with  peculiar  solemnity  and  effect  that  holiness  of  life,  with  the  means  thereto,  so  char- 
acteristic ofthe  Fathers  of  that  trying  age.  With  high  respect  and  esteem,  your  friend  and 
servant,  L.  S.  IVES. 

HARE'S    PAROCHIAL    SERMONS. 

Sermons  to  a  Country  Congregation.  By  Augustus  WiUiam 
Hare,  A.M.,  late  Fellow  of  New  College,  and  Rector  of  Alton 
Barnes.     One  volume,  royal  8vo.     $2  25. 

"  Any  one  who  can  be  pleased  with  delicacy  of  thought  expressed  in  the  most  simple  Ian 
guage — any  one  who  can  feel  the  charm  of  finding  practical  duties  elucidated  and  enforced 
by  apt  and  varied  illustrations--will  be  delighted  with  this  volume,  which  presents  us  with  the 
workings  uf  a  pious  and  highly  gifted  mind." — Quar.  Review. 


4       D.  Appleton  ^  Co.^s  Catalogue  of  Valuable  Works. 

THE    KINGDOM    OF    CHRIST; 

Or,  Hints  respecting  the  Principles,  Constitution,  and  Ordinances 
of  the  Catholic  Church.  By  Frederick  Denison  Maurice, 
M.A.  Chaplain  of  Guy's  Hospital,  Professor  of  EngUsh  Litera- 
ture and  History,  King's  College,  London.  In  one  elegant  oc- 
tavo volume  of  600  pages,  uniform  in  style  with  Newman's 
Sermons,  Palmer  on  the  Church,  &-c.     $2  50. 

"  Mr.  Maurice's  work  is  eminently  fitted  to  engage  tlie  attention  and  meet  the  wants  of  all 
interested  in  the  several  movements  tbat  are  now  taking  place  in  the  religions  community  ;  it 
takes  up  the  pretensions  generally  of  the  several  Protestant  denominations  and  of  the  Ro- 
manists, so  as  to  commend  itself  in  the  growing  interest  in  the  controversy  between  the  lat- 
ter and  their  opponents.  The  political  portion  of  the  work  contains  much  that  is  attractive 
to  a  thoughtful  man,  of  any  or  of  no  religious  persuasion,  in  reference  to  the  existing  and  poa 
eible  future  state  of  our  country." 

A    MANUAL    FOR    COMMUNICANTS; 

Or  the  Order  for  Administering  the  Holy  Comnmnion ;  conveniently  ar- 
ranged with  Meditations  and  Prayers  from  Old  English  Divines,  being 
the  Eucharistica  of  Samuel  Wilberforce,  M.A.,  Archdeacon  of  Surry, 
(adapted  to  the  American  service.)  Convenient  size  for  the  pocket 
37i  cents— gilt  edges  50  cents. 

"  These  meditations,  prayers,  and  expositions,  are  given  in  the  very  words  of  the  illustri- 
ous divines,  martyrs,  coufsssors,  and  doctors  of  the  Church;  and  th<;y  furm  altogether 
Buch  a  body  of  instr-ictive  matter  as  is  nowhere  else  to  be  found  in  the  same  com- 
pass. Though  collected  from  various  authors,  the  whole  is  pervaded  by  a  unity  of  spirit  and 
purpose;  and  we  most  earnestly  commend  the  work  as  better  fitted  than  any  other  which 
we  know,  to  subserve  the  ends  of  sound  edification  and  fervent  and  substantial  devotion. 
The  American  reprint  has  been  edited  by  a  deacon  of  great  promise  in  the  Church,  and  is  ap- 
propriately dedicated  to  the  Bishop  of  this  diocese." — Churchmau. 

OGILBY  ON    LAY-BAPTISM  : 

An  Outline  on  the  Argument  against  the  Validity  of  Lay-Baptism.  By  the 
Rev.  John  D.  Ogilby,  A.M.,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History.  One 
volume  12mo.,  75  cents. 

"  We  have  been  favoured  with  a  copy  of  the  above  work,  and  lose  no  time  in  announcing 
its  publication.  From  a  cursory  inspection  of  it,  we  take  it  to  ba  a  thorough,  fearless,  and 
very  able  discussion  of  the  subject  which  it  proposes,  aiming  less  to  excite  inquiry,  than  to 
satisfy,  by  learned  and  ingenious  argument,  inquiries  already  excited." — Churchman. 

THE    PRIMITIVE     DOCTRINE    OF 
E  LECTI  O  N  : 

Or,  an  Historical   Inquiry  into  the  Ideality  and  Causation  of  Scriptural 
Election,  as  received  and  maintained  in  the  Primitive  Church  ol  Christ. 
By  George  Stanley  Faber,  B.D.,  author  of  "  Difficulties  of  Romanism," 
♦'  Difficulties  of  Infidelity,"  &c.    Complete  in  one  volume  octavo.  $1  75. 
"  Mr.  Faber  verifies  his  opinion  by  demonstraition.      We  cannot  pay  a  higher  respect  to  hia 

work  than  by  recommending  it  to  all."— C/ii«v/t  of  England,  Quarlcrly  Rcvuw, 


D.  Appleton  ^  Co.*8  Catalogue  of  Valuable  Works.        5 

CHURCHMAN'S  LIBRARY. 

The  volumes  of  this  series  we  of  a  standard  character  and  highly  recom- 
mended by  the  Bishops  and  Clergy  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 

THE    PRACTICAL    CHRISTIAN; 

Or,  Devout  Penitent.  By  R.  Sherlocke,  D.D.,  with  a  Life  of  the  Author,  by 
the  Right  Rev.  Bishop  Wilson.     One  elegant  volume.      16mo.    75  cents. 

THE  CHURCHMAN'S  COMPANION  IN  THE  CLOSET; 

Or,  a  Complete  Manual  of  Private  Devotions.  Collected  from  the  -writings  of 
Archbishop  Land,  Bishop  Andrewes,  Bishop  Ken,  Dr.  Hickes,  Mr.  Kettle- 
well,  Mr.  Spinckes,  and  other  eminent  old  English  Divines.  With  a  Pre- 
face by  Rsv.  Mr.  Spinckes.  Edited  by  Francis  E.  Paget,  M.  A.  One  ele- 
gant volume,  16mo.    $1  00. 

OF    THE    IMITATION    OF    CHRIST- 

Four  books,  by  Thomas  h  Kempis,  a  new  and  complete  edition,  elegantly 
printed.     1  vol.  16mo.    $1  00. 

THE     EARLY    ENGLISH     CHURCH; 

Or,  Christian  Histoiy  of  England  in  early  British,  Saxon,  and  Norman  Times 
By  the  Rev.  Edward  Churton,  M.A.  With  a  Preface  by  the  Right  Rev. 
Bishop  Ives.    1  vol.  16mo.,  elegantly  ornamented.    $1  00 

LEARN   TO    DIE. 

Disce  Mori,  Learn  to  Die  :  a  Religious  Discourse,  moving  every  Christian 
man  to  enter  into  a  serious  Remembrance  of  his  End.  By  Christopher  Sut 
ton,  D.D.,  late  Prebend  of  Westminster.  1  vol.  16mo.,  elegantly  orna- 
mented.   $1  00. 

SACRA    PRIVATA  : 

The  Private  Meditations,  Devotions,  and  Prayers  of  the  Right  Rev.  T.  Wil- 
son, D.D.,  Lord  Bishop  of  Soder  and  Man.  First  complete  edition.  1  voL 
royal  I6mo.,  elegantly  ornamented.     $1  00. 

MEDITATIONS  ON   TH  E  SACRAMENT. 

Godly  Meditations  upon  the  most  Holy  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  By 
Christopher  Sutton,  D.D.,  late  Prebend  of  Westminster.  1  vol.  royal  16mo., 
elegantly  ornamented.     $1  00. 

A    DISCOURSE    CONCERNING    PRAYER 

And  the  frequenting  Daily  Public  Prayer.  By  Sjrmon  Patrick,  D.D.,  sometime 
Lord  Bishop  of  Ely.  Edited  by  Francis  E.  Paget,  M.A.,  Chaplain  to  the 
Lord  Bishop  of  Oxford.     1  vol.  royal  16mo.,  elegantly  ornamented.  75  cents 


THOUGHTS   IN    PAST    YEARS. 

.  beautiful  collection  of  Poetry,  chiefly  Devotional.     By  the  author  o 
Cathedral."     1  vol.  royal  16mo.,  elegantly  printed.     $1  25. 

THE    CHRISTMAS    BELLS: 

.  Tale  of  Holy   Tide,  and  other  Poems.     By  the  author  of  "  Com 
"Virginia,"  &&     1  vol.  royal  16mo.,  elegantly  ornamented.     75  c 

*,*  These  volumes  will  be  followed  by  others  of  equal  importance. 


D.  Appleton  ^  CoJ's  Catalogue  of  Valuable  Works. 

Cabinet  Edition  of  the  Poets. 


COWPER'S   COMPLETE    POETICAL 
NA^ORKS. 

The  complete  Poetical  Works  of  William  Covvper,  Esq.,  including 
the  Hymns  and  Translations  from  Mad.  Guion,  Milton,  &c.,  and 
Adam,  a  Sacred  Drama,  from  the  Italian  of  Battista  Andreini, 
with  a  Memoir  uf  the  Author,  by  the  Rev.  Henry  Stabbing,  A.M. 
Two  elegantly  printed  volumes,  400  pages  each,  l6mo.,  with 
beautiful  frontispieces.     $1  75. 

This  is  the  only  complete  American  edition. 
Morality  never  found  in  genius  a  more  devoted  advocate  than  Cowper,  nor 
has  moral  wisdom,  in  its  plain  and  severe  precepts,  been  ever  more  success- 
fully combined  with  the  delicate  spirit  of  poetry,  than  in  his  works.  He 
was  endowed  with  all  the  powers  which  a  poet  could  want  who  was  to  be  the 
moralist  of  the  world — the  reprover,  but  not  the  satirist,  of  men — the  teacher 
of  simple  truths,  which  were  to  be  rendered  gracious  without  endangering 
iheir  simplicity. 

BURNS'    COMPLETE   POETICAL 
NA^ORKS. 

The  complete  Poetical  Works  of  Robert  Bums,  with  Explanatory 
and  Glossarial  Notes,  and  a  Life  of  the  Author,  by  James  Cui- 
rie,  M.D.     1  vol.  16rao.     $1  25. 

This  is  the  most  complete  edition  which  has  been  published,  and  contains 
the  whole  of  the  poetry  comprised  in  the  edition  lately  edited  by  Cunningham, 
as  well  as  some  additional  pieces  ;  and  such  notes  have  been  added  as  are  cal- 
culated to  illustrate  the  manners  and  customs  of  Scotland,  so  as  to  render  the 
whole  more  intelligible  to  the  English  reader. 

"  No  poet,  with  the  exception  of  Shakspeare,  ever  possessed  the  power  ol 
exciting  the  most  varied  and  discordzmt  emotions  with  such  rapid  transitions." 
—Sir  W.  Scott. 

MILTON'S    COMPLETE    POETICAL 
WORKS. 

The  complete  Poetical  Works  of  Jolin  Milton,  with  Explanatory 
Notes  and  a  Life  of  the  Author,  by  the  Rev.  Henry  Stebbing, 
A.M.     Beautifully  iUustrated.     1  vol.  16mo.     $125. 
The  Latin  and  Italian  Poems  are  included  in  this  eidition. 
Mr.  Stebbing's  notes  will  be  found  very  useful  in  elucidating  the  learned 
allusions  with  which  the  text  abounds,  and  they  are  also  valuable  for  the 
correct  appreciation  with  which  the  writer  directs  attention  to  the  beau- 
ties of  the  author. 

SCOTT'S   POETICAL  NA^ORKS. 

The  Poetical  Works  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  Bart. — Containing  Lay 
of  the  Last  Minstrel,  Marmion,  Lady  of  the  Lake,  Don  Rode- 
rick, Rokeby,  Ballads,  Lyrics,  and  Songs,  with  a  Life  of  the 
Author.    Uniform  with  Cowper,  Bums,  &c.    1  vol.  16mo  $1  25. 

"  Walter  Scott  is  the  most  popular  of  all  the  poets  of  the  present  day,  and  de- 
servedly so.  He  describes  that  which  is  most  easily  and  generally  understood 
with  more  vivacity  and  effect  than  any  other  writer.  His  style  is  clear,  flowiLg 
and  transparent ;  his  sentiments,  of  which  his  style  is  an  easy  and  natural  me 
ilium,  are  common  to  him  with  his  readers." — Haxlitt. 


Date  Due 

'^^*6'4g 

-w^ 

• 

<l) 

I 

